Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

Dillon wrote:

the area to be researched would be honor killings, and broken down you would find that the highest number are by Muslims.

So you’re saying it’s a Muslim thing then?

What I'm saying is if you cateogorize it in the UK that would be the result.

White Collar Crime is a crime committed by a person of respectability and high social standing in the course of his or her profession, so in India this would most likely be a brown person and in China a Yellow one, if you targeted any specific social or ethnic group they would make up 100% of the guilty parties

That's true if statistics were drawn from those two countrires. Of course when you have a 90% majority of one race that would be the obvious. In the UK and the US the obvious would be the white race.

But no one is advocating this, no one is targeting muslims as a subject group, the thread is about Honour killings on the increase in the UK, where the population is roughly made up of 3.5% British Asian Pakistani/Bangladeshi and 3.5% British Asian Indian/SE Asian but yet the guilty parties are overwhelmingly predominately muslim?

I know that no one is "targeting" muslims, it is the outcome of a study.

People are quick to point out that Sikhs, Hindu’s and other ethnic/religious groups are also guilty of the crime, no one is denying this, but it also doesn’t provide license for other ethnic/religious groups to excel at the practice does it? I think Herve has provided the most insight into this question and that is by mention of the reduced punishment by Sharia law in cases involving crimes of Honour, this is without doubt, justification to a degree of honour crimes in a muslim society.

http://www.arabnews.com/lifestyle/islam ... 456048.ece

[color=#BF0000The practice of honor killings is, obviously, rooted in the erroneous notion that the honor of a family revolves around the sexual conduct of women. This leads many Muslim men to murder their young daughters or sisters in cold blood. This inhuman practice, a modern version of the pre-Islamic practice of burying female babies alive, is present in some Muslim countries]

It is ironic that many Muslim communities have developed a sense of honor that is far removed from the fundamental teachings of the Holy Qur’an. The most honorable in the eyes of Allah is the most righteous irrespective of sex or tribe.

It is ironic that many Muslim communities have developed a sense of honor that is far removed from the fundamental teachings of the Holy Qur’an. The most honorable in the eyes of Allah is the most righteous irrespective of sex or tribe.

Another major legal issue involved in the honor killing is that the girl’s relatives believe that their honor is compromised just because a girl talked or met with another man. It is not an act that deserves execution according to Islamic teachings (Shariah).

I agree with Herve, you say tomahto, I say tomayto, it comes down to the same thing, which is: murder. But one will use the term that applies depending on what country you are standing in at the time, and that would include "punishment that fits the crime".
[/color]

Look at the countries that these first wave immigrants come from. They are classified as third world countries, have a huge population of uneducated people, live in the 19th century and the further you go out to the surrounding areas you find less civilized people. First wave immigrants bring with them culture, tradition and beliefs that are strongly ingrained in them. Those beliefs are passed down and burned into their minds of their male offspring born in the adopted country. I'm sure the fathers who commit "honor killings" were first wave immigrants.

To be it's like a boy being raised by wolves. All he knows is the behavior he was conditioned to know. Rescued by people he would have to be reprogrammed. But as successful as a reprogramming could be there could still be behavior that is so ingrained in him that it cannot be removed.

Every ethnic group that migrates to another country brings with them culture, tradition and beliefs, and for the most part they know that much of it can be unacceptable to the law governing their country of choice.

So, if your commit murder in the name of honor killing, it is still murder, for which some people in civilized countries can find justification, but for the most part, the punishment would be the same. BUT, the laws in civilized countries are interpreted as well by lawyers and judges, and judges, if they so chose, can ignore laws or override sentences handed down by a jury..

Bora, even if you look at UK (or Canada or US), honour killings is not exclusively a Muslim phenomenon.

I totally agree it is a problem within the Muslim community, as it is a problem within Hindu and Sikh community - one honour killing is one too many. I totally agree that it is a crime which we should denounce, but more importantly work towards eradicating.

The common denominator is a distorted sense of honour that stems from a cultural values that are not drawn from religion. Chinese Muslims, for example, or the Dutch Muslims (to pick a recent example) are not carrying out honour killings. Therefore the reason isn't the religion of Islam.

I also agree that it is categorically murder and should be dealt with as such. We should also keep in mind that all murders are bad, and that honour killings are also part of a global problem of violence against women. All this violence is bad, and all murders are bad. We shouldn't fall into the trap of blowing the scale of the problem out of proportion - globally, about 5000 honour murders are committed each year - that's a third of the murders in the USA alone, and a fraction of the murders globally. That is not to negate the problem - just to put it into perspective.

That some of the murderers may use religion as an excuse, highlights an area where Islamic clerics should work harder on.

Cheers,
Shafique

the Dutch Muslims (to pick a recent example) are not carrying out honour killings.

You couldnt be more wrong.

shafique wrote:That some of the murderers may use religion as an excuse, highlights an area where Islamic clerics should work harder on.

Have a word with Abu Hamza. I believe he has a captive audience at the moment.

FD - I posted examples of Dutch Muslims to counter your post saying that Muslims are not Europeans. This showed you were wrong (as you were wrong when you made up the 70% statistic).

Are the ethinically white Dutch Muslims carrying out honour killings? If not, then my case is made - it is a crime by a limited number of criminals from cultural backgrounds where this crime is excused. It is not linked to Islam (or any other religion).

Cheers,
Shafique

Bora Bora wrote:Look at the countries that these first wave immigrants come from. They are classified as third world countries, have a huge population of uneducated people, live in the 19th century and the further you go out to the surrounding areas you find less civilized people. First wave immigrants bring with them culture, tradition and beliefs that are strongly ingrained in them. Those beliefs are passed down and burned into their minds of their male offspring born in the adopted country. I'm sure the fathers who commit "honor killings" were first wave immigrants. To be it's like a boy being raised by wolves. All he knows is the behavior he was conditioned to know. Rescued by people he would have to be reprogrammed. But as successful as a reprogramming could be there could still be behavior that is so ingrained in him that it cannot be removed.Every ethnic group that migrates to another country brings with them culture, tradition and beliefs, and for the most part they know that much of it can be unacceptable to the law governing their country of choice.

Indians have been exported around the world by the British Raj since the mid 19th Century, this is when first wave immigrants came to the UK and they have had five generations of a 1st world education system, to adapt from their culture, tradition and beliefs. At that time Pakistan and Bangladesh didn’t exist and the ethnic tribal and religious mix of the Indians was much the same as the combined ethnic tribal and religious mix of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh today, which is around 30% Muslim, 65% Hindu and 5% others to include, in the main, Christians, Sikhs, jains.

Now using your logic, as these people came from the same stock since the 1850’s, one would expect that culture, tradition and the beliefs of the Diaspora would evolve at the same rate, but it hasn’t.

In the UK, with a population of around 3.5% of the total educated population, and equal to other British Asian minorities, the guilty parties are overwhelmingly predominately muslim.

Why is that?

And the issue of Sharia Law de-criminalising murder, has yet to be addressed.

It’s simply a matter of cause and effect

Cause and Effect?

When an action or event will produce a defined response to the action in the form of another clearly defined event.

What a sick way of addressing the problem of Honour Killings! Even Nucleus now believes there are paranoid schizophrenics on the forum!

Dillon wrote:
Now using your logic, as these people came from the same stock since the 1850’s, one would expect that culture, tradition and the beliefs of the Diaspora would evolve at the same rate, but it hasn’t.

Well, the flaw in your argument stems from this assumption that the evolution of beliefs will take place at the same rate.

This assumption is flawed on two levels, IMO.

One is that immigrants tend to hold on to their traditional values more strongly and end up being more conservative than populations back home. This is a trend that goes back to many diaspora communities in history - from Greeks to Zorastrians to even communities in the USA which maintain elements of Elizabethan English which was long ago lost in the UK.

This is the case with Pakistani, Hindu and Sikh families who emigrated in the 60s.

The other effect is the cultural and educational background of the immigrants - it is not 'the same stock' but rather a mix of different communites from the Indian sub-continent - different areas, cultural practices and education. Those coming from less educated backgrounds, coming over to fill posts that are less or unskilled, are the ones who bring over the cultural baggage that leads them to have the outdated views.

Indeed, the issue in India and Pakistan is one where honour killings predominantly are carried out in communities which have lower levels of education and in communities which are largely tribal.

So - on one level, it is not uncommon for there to be different speeds of cultural evolution - and this is the case here, but also you need to look at the differing cultural mores of the home communities from which the immigrants are coming from - eg A 70 year old British Sikh lady in 2007 committed an honour killing, but committed the act when she was visiting India.

At the end of the day, honour killings are a problem and are a feature of some Muslim, Hindu and Sikh etc communities. It is not the fault of any religion, but I do agree that it is a concern in some Muslim communities. I do think credit should be given to the clerics etc who use religion to correct the wrong view of these murders, and I've challenged the eh and herve to produce one cleric that agrees with them that honour killings are permissable in Islam.

Cheers,
Shafique

Well, I could give your explanation some credence if the subject matter was just Smashing plates at a wedding, but we're talking here about murdering your own children.

Musilm, Indian, same Diaspora different religion.

And the question everyone is avoiding?

A Keralan Muslim Indian is very different from an Indian Muslim from Kashmir - as is an Indian Muslim from Orissa.

Not everyone with a brown skin and black hair has the same cultural background - different languages, foods etc. Yet all 'Indian'.

Murdering one's child is a feature of a number of communities in India and Pakistan, and the common denominator is not the religion. The stronger correlation is cultural practice and education.

Immigrant communites are not homogenous as a whole, but in some areas there are concentrations of people from a certain area - Kashmiris in Bradford, Sikhs in Southall etc. The cultural traditions do tend to ossify and lack the progress in the home countries, but they do start from the same position.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote: but they do start from the same position.

Cheers,
Shafique

Fragmented, just exactly the same as any other Nation and as I said originally, from the same stock.

And the question everyone is still avoiding?

What is the 'same stock'? Different culture, ethnicity, food etc - a Keralan and a Kashmir Indian would be as similar as a Greek and Swede.

Cheers,
Shafique

I think we both understand the meaning of 'same stock' in this conversation, if you're genuinely unsure and not just being pedantic, read the back posts again.

And the question everyone is still avoiding?

I am genuinely unsure as to why you're not understanding that 'same stock' does not make sense when looking at the differing communities which the crimes of honour killings take place.

Focusing on one type of crime against women is all good and well when trying to understand and tackle this sub-set of crimes against women. I'm all for all the efforts being made to tackle this crime. Understanding who carries out these crimes is helpful.

What I do object to though is the Islamophobic and xenophobic argument that generalises the instances of these crimes to a community, 'same stock' or a religion.

I've not come across an argument trying to link the stats that one in 5 women in Europe suffer domestic violence with either race or religion. The stats show that alcohol intake is a major factor. The stats also show how many of the women murdered in the 'West' are at the hands of intimate partners - and again, we'd dismiss attempts to paint this as a failing of Christianity or of a problem of the 'same stock'. Well, I would.

Cheers,
Shafique

Well that’s all very interesting Shaf but it doesn’t bear a great deal of relevance to the subject matter, which is the increase in honour killings in the UK and the fact that the guilty parties are overwhelmingly predominately muslim, and let’s not forget the question that everyone is still hesitant to address?

I thought my post was completely relevant as it was addressing the notion in the OP that the religion of the criminals was the cause of the criminality.

That the criminals are 'overwhelmingly' and 'predominantly' Muslim is a good starting point for the theory that Islam is causality behind these honour killings. The quote on the first page of this thread states that it is not the religion of the criminals which is the cause, but rather the cultural values. Given that the non-Muslim criminals do share a cultural background but not a religion goes to strengthen this point.

But let's also give herve and eh a chance to produce a direct quote from an Islamic cleric that Islam allows honour killings. There are many examples which say it isn't.

Cheers,
Shafique

I rather thought the OP was about religion being used as an excuse rather than being the cause, and if it is against Islamic teachings then why are muslims the overwhelming predominant perpetrators?

And Given that the non-Muslim criminals share a cultural background but not a religion, and the overwhelming number of perpetrators are muslim strengthen another completely different point!

And the question that people are still avoiding?

It is against Islamic teachings, Hindu teachings and Sikh teachings.

The question is why are you focusing on religion rather than the other common factors shared by the criminals?

As per the quote on the first page from the BBC - I've highlighted the common aspect:

"People try to blame Muslims, Hindus or Sikhs but it tends to happen in families where there are the strongest ties and expectations. It's a very strong cultural issue."

Leaders of the world's faiths have also strongly denounced a connection between religion and honour killings.

Cheers,
Shafique

Dillon wrote:if it is against Islamic teachings then why are muslims the overwhelming predominant perpetrators?

Low levels of education, and never actually reading Quran?

Andyba wrote:

Dillon wrote:if it is against Islamic teachings then why are muslims the overwhelming predominant perpetrators?

Low levels of education, and never actually reading Quran?

Ding! Ding! Ding ! we have a winner

The reasons stated by offenders for honor murders are:

Defying parental authority.
Becoming “westernised” in terms of dress, attitudes and behaviour.
Women (NOT men) having pre-marital sexual relations.
Drugs and alcohol.
Gossip. In many cases honour is damaged less by a person’s action than by knowledge of that action becoming public knowledge.

The reason why honor murders ARE islamic are in the quran:

Defying parental Authority. Islam is not the only patriarchal society present within the UK, but Islam’s Patriarchal nature is clearly written into its religious code in that women are expected to obey men throughout their lives (K.4:34; Bukhari Vol.4, Bk.54, No.460, Vol.7, Bk.62, No.81, Vol.7 Bk.62, No.121; Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 11, Number 2135, book 11, Number 2141, Book 11, Number 2142; Ibn Majah 1854; Mishkat al-Masabih Book 1:60, Book 1:61; Kanz el’Ummal, Vol.22, No.868; Ishaq p969; Tirmidhi Hadith, Number 104. These quotes generally reflect the level of obedience required of Muslim wives to their husbands. Given that all societies regard children as owing obedience to their parents we can deduce that un-wed women and girls are required to be obedient to their fathers, and other close male relatives.)

Westernisation. Islam has it’s own religiously mandated dress code (K.33:59, 24:31) . Setting aside the controversy as to whether Muslimas should be fully covered (at one extreme) or merely dress “modestly” (at the other), Muslim women who defy this convention – as defined by family or community - are often considered to be quasi-apostates or “hypocrites” in Islamic terms since they are defying the “rules” and since Islam is a theocratic system they are rebelling against Allah by adopting western dress – or attitudes and behaviour.
Further, a Muslima who adopts western attitudes – including ideas such as self-determination – can be seen (again) as rejecting Islam and thus becoming a “hypocrite” or quasi-apostate in Islamic terms.
Even “going out” can be considered un-Islamic since under strict interpretations a Muslima should not leave her house (once she has started menstruating) without an accompanying “Muhram” – a suitable male relative – to “protect” her.
Further, since (some sections of) Muslim society take a totally rejectionist attitude to Western society, any adoption of “Western” values etc. will be seen as a rejection of Muslim – i.e.Islamic – society and values. Again this can lead to HBV since the woman has ‘dishonoured’ her family in this way.
Pre-marital sex. Again, whilst it is not unique to Islamic society, much store is placed in the bride being a virgin on her wedding night (so much so that there is a burgeoning plastic surgery industry in “re-virginisation” so ensure that the woman bleeds on her wedding night), so extra-marital sex is another “affront” to the proper behaviour of Muslim women (K.23:5).

Drink and drugs. These are both banned in Islam (K.2:219, 5:90-91) though in practice many Muslims do use drugs (e,g, Kaat in North Africa and Opium/Heroin in Pakistan-Afghanistan), thus when Muslim women in particular indulge they are seen as rejecting Islam. This is particularly true in the west, where drink and drug use are seen as “Western debauchery”.

Gossip: Islam contains the doctrine of “Sitr”. In simple terms when a person does something “shameful” or “dishonourable” within the Muslim community, it should be hushed up and only repeated offenders should be brought to (Islamic) justice. This is justified on the grounds that in the Hadith a duty is laid on Muslims to protect each other and each other’s honour.

Thus, according to Dr. Qaradawi, if someone assaulted another in a rage, got drunk, visited a prostitute, etc then if he were exposed, he would be shamed. Under the doctrine of Sitr, in order to preserve the person’s “honour”, the offence should be covered up.

Note that this “cover-up” applies to both criminal and immoral behaviour. This should not surprise us, since Islam rarely distinguishes the two, treating both types of reprehensible behaviour as crimes under Sharia Law. (Hence the “wall of silence” that often faces law enforcement when investigating crimes – including terrorism - within the Muslim community.)

Thus gossip is very damaging. Once a person’s misdemeanours become “common knowledge” they are then liable to punishment. The reverse-side of this particular doctrinal coin is that a campaign of gossip can also besmirch a person’s “honour”. Usually the victims of this are women and the family may then react with HBV in order to restore their ‘honour’.

Curiously not mentioned in the SCS report is adultery. If a Muslim commits adultery s/he is to be stoned to death (Malik’s Muwatta Bk 41, No 41.1.5). However, this punishment is most often applied to women due to the requirement that a rape allegation (which is taken as an admission of “illegal intercourse”) requires four male witnesses to substantiate (this rule is based on a rather perverse – to non-Muslims – interpretation of K.4:24). In western Countries such a punishment for either adultery or rape is un-enforcable, but an accusation of adultery will often render a Muslima liable to HBV.

All these occurences constitute MAJOR offences in the islamic law, hence killing to "punish" the musluma is condoned.Not only condoned , but islamic law, sharia law does not provide punishment, or little punishment for those who murder in honor, again condoning honor murder.
Not surprisingly, bigots and muslum propagandists on DF, continue to be hypocrites, repeat and deny these facts over, over, over and over.
http://www.faithfreedom.org/articles/wo ... d-kingdom/

shafique, I’ve read all your previous posts and constantly repeating them doesn’t add to their value, I think it is patently obvious why I’m focusing on my question of why are the majority of perpetrators of Honour Crimes in the UK muslim, because the majority of perpetrators of Honour Crimes in the UK are in fact, muslim, why? When there are just as many members of other religions in the UK with the same cultural values, it’s predominately muslims who throw acid in the faces of, and murder their children?

And the question that you keep ignoring? You know, the one about Sharia Law decriminalising Murder?

Low levels of education, and never actually reading Quran?

Andyba, British Pakistani’s and British Bangladeshi’s are not segregated in the UK, they are educated alongside every other Nationality within the tertiary education system, so poor education isn’t a contributing factor and I really don’t think you should need to read a book of fiction to know it is at least, socially unacceptable to kill your Sister or Daughter!

Dillon I thought I explained explicitly that that Islam does not condone honour murders, nor that Hindu or Sikh religions condone honour murders carried by Hindus or Sikhs.

There's even a clear challenge to herve and eh to produce a single cleric that says categorically/clearly that Islam allows honour killings. I extend that challenge to you.

You seem to be struggling with the concept of correlation and causality.

Let me give you an example from the insurance industry. If you look at the number of motor accidents in the UK and the sales of woolen clothing items, you will find a very strong correlation. The months with the highest number of accidents are the same months where sales of woolen clothing items are highest - and vice versa.

Sales of woolen items are strongly correlated with motor car accidents.

However, there is no causality. The causal link is actually a separate factor. In this case it is cold weather.

Motor accidents are correlated to cold weather, and there IS causality there.


Now substitute 'Honour killings' for 'motor accidents' and 'religion' for 'woolen clothing', and 'cultural background and educational level' for 'cold weather'.

Here endeth the lesson.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Dillon I thought I explained explicitly that that Islam does not condone honour murders, nor that Hindu or Sikh religions condone honour murders carried by Hindus or Sikhs.

You have, and for some reason you appear to be under the misapprehension that I didn’t read your earlier posts? Islam also does not condone the consumption of alcohol and lots of other things that you can witness every weekend throughout Dubai, and I’ve no doubt many other major cities worldwide too, that good muslims are getting up to, just because you and the BBC believe it isn’t written in your good book doesn’t mean to say that others interpret the content differently does it?

shafique wrote:There's even a clear challenge to herve and eh to produce a single cleric that says categorically/clearly that Islam allows honour killings. I extend that challenge to you.

Why on Earth should I want to read your book of fiction and try to find something that you claim doesn’t exist?

There is no confusion in my mind between correlation and causality, the correlation between the Months of elevated motor car accidents and increased sales of woollen clothing items are the winter Months, which you have failed to identify, where cold, wet and freezing weather conditions, contribute to both, and as an actuary I would have thought you would have received the training for you to be able to identify this?

My questions which you appear to be struggling with is;

1. Why the majority of perpetrators of Honour Crimes in the UK are in fact, muslim, When there are just as many members and more, of other religions in the UK with the same cultural values.

2. The other question that you keep ignoring? You know, the one about Sharia Law decriminalising Murder?

By the way, Sarcasm just isn’t one of your strong points, better not eh!

You are labouring under a false impression Dillon that I misunderstood your posts. I didn't - I fully got that you read my posts.

I was simply pointing out that you are mistaking correlation with causality. As for not identifying the 'cold weather' for you.. may I just refer you to the sentence in the post above:

shafique wrote:Now substitute 'Honour killings' for 'motor accidents' and 'religion' for 'woolen clothing', and 'cultural background and educational level' for 'cold weather'.

You are also missing a fundamental point - Islam does not (nor does any other religion) allow honour killings/murders. Sharia law is the judicial part of Islam and that therefore cannot condone honour murders. Ergo, this is another misconception your labouring under.

If Islam does allow honour killings, then eh, herve and now yourself would have been able to meet the challenge I set which was to quote an Islamic cleric that says Islam allows honour killings. The silence is deafening.

Cheers,
Shafique

I think some people have big issues with religion. You give final conclusion based on your ignorance. So can any person please give me the final judgment about Islam. Are you telling everone that Islam hate other people and encourge killing women?

Yosef, can you please clarify - are you addressing your comment to Dillon or to myself?

Cheers,
Shafique

Yosef,
You need to make your own mind up on that one.

I am asking everyone who attack religions as all. But here I think the main problem we have many topics that attack Islam in most of religion and politics section. So I am asking people who hate Islam to give me a short conclusion of their opinion about Islam. Do they think it is a religion supporting the killing of women and hate other religions and societies? Is this what they realy think about Islam?

There has been no attack, hatred or final judgement from me, just two questions that so far are left unanswered;

1. Why the majority of perpetrators of Honour Crimes in the UK are in fact, muslim, When there are just as many members and more, of other religions in the UK with the same cultural values.
2. The other question that people keep ignoring? You know, the one about Sharia Law decriminalising Murder

Perhaps you would care to enlighten me Yosef?

All religions got their soft and harsh side, and you are not expected to apply all. I am telling you in Syria there are honor killing done by Christians but no body is blaming religion. It is matter of stupid culture belief.

Now tell me why there is too many topics expresing hate to islam and even christianity? Religion is put for personal belief.