Posted on 06/29/2005 10:27:50 AM PDT by RonF
Unfortunately, neither article delves into the breakdown of religious affiliation in the region where these killings occur. I maintain that such details would not yield the results that apologists for Islam would welcome.
I took a class where we talked about this at length before 9/11. I had just seen a show on honor killings and quizzed the professor about it. This man was a patriot--not your run-of-the-mill anti-patriotic college professor. He had lived in the Middle East idoing intelligence work and he explained the concept of honor, family and why they were so critical and how honor killings fit into it. Mohammed actually treated his wives with respect in comparison to the other men of his day and was criticized for it. His first wife was his boss and much his elder--but she was the business person of the family. It's believed she may have died of famine because of war between tribes. He actually wanted to prevent that kind of thing. No, I'm not doing an apology here for Mohammed--I think he has proven to be one of the worst influences on mankind in history. But RonF is correct in what he is saying here.
And the first link makes it pretty clear that the killings they are talking about are being done by Hindus. Islam does not have or recognize castes. There's no way that a caste-based group is going to be a bunch of Moslems.
I don't offer this as an apologia for Islam. It's quite obvious that Islam doesn't seem to concern itself much with honor killings in those countries where it is dominant. My object here is "know your enemy". If you make the assumption that these acts stem from religion instead of culture, you'll misunderstand the people you're dealing with. In this case the religion seems to have adapted itself to the culture, instead of the other way around. And that's a phenomenon that is something that conservative Western Christians have observed in their own lands.
Islam does not have or recognize castes.
Specifically or in practice? Tell a Copt that the Muslims in Egypt don't believe in a two-tiered society and he'll hurt himself laughing in your face.
Just a couple I found in a few minutes
http://womensissues.about.com/cs/honorkillings/a/honorkillings.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor_killing
"Specifically or in practice? Tell a Copt that the Muslims in Egypt don't believe in a two-tiered society and he'll hurt himself laughing in your face."
Religious discrimination and financial classes are not the same thing as caste. Believe me, I took a class on Indian culture and history at NYU. Islam was able to thrive in India as a reaction to the caste system. Islam teaches, like Christianity, equality.
But it seems that Islam only teaches that fellow Islamics are more equal than others.
See post 21.
I guess you have already determined what you want to hear, so never mind.
"Islam teaches, like Christianity, equality.
But it seems that Islam only teaches that fellow Islamics are more equal than others."
Not anymore than the Torah/Old Testament or even the New Testament which says that those who don't accept Christ are hellbound. In fact, probably less. The greatest criticism that the Koran has of Judaism is the concept of the "chosen people." It says something like, "Ask a Jew if a sin committed by a Jew is any less of a sin in God's eyes than one committed by a non-Jew."
I think the reason Islamic culture is so backwards has more to do with Arab culture than anything specifically written in the Koran. The Torah says some barbaric stuff too, after all.
Hmmm, missed that part. Care to quote chapter and verse?
Said the pot of the kettle.
Read the article. They are talking about the formal Hindu caste system. Your assertion that this only occurs in countries where Moslems are in the majority is refuted.
Yes, which is why I pointed out the difference between that and treating others as second-class citizens.
Your assertion that this only occurs in countries where Moslems are in the majority is refuted.
Not by a long shot. I still maintain that the regions (notice I did not say nation) with a majority Muslim population will produce more honor killings than other areas, a statement you haven't refuted in any way, shape, or form.
But thanks for playing.
I also did a search on "caste panchayat". The first reference I found discusses what caste panchayats are and how they work. Here is a key quote:
The Patil putta (subcaste), at the top, are the panchayat eldermen, headmen, and priests. The others in rank order are: the Chougle, assistants to the Patils; the Komti tradesmen and money lenders; and the Daundiwallas, servants of the panchayat and executors of punishment. Higher sub-caste ranking corresponds with higher economic standing. It is believed that these divisions arose as a consequence of violation of caste rules and other wrong-doings by the process of excommunication and suspension from regular everyday roles. The higher sub-castes follow stricter purity rules, consider those below them as polluting, and expect deference from them. Each sub-caste is an endogamous group. some of the settled Nandiwalla groups do not follow the sub-caste rules. Unlike many Nandiwalla groups that have a Patil as village priest, the Tirumal Nandiwallas in this study have had a Brahmin as their guru, or spiritual advisor.
The castes mentioned here are all Hindu castes, not that there's such a thing as Moslem castes, anyway. And a body that has a Patil or a Brahmin as spiritual advisor is not going to have a Moslem participating in it.
What we have here is an example of "honor" killings executed in a majority Hindu area and adjudged by a Hindu civil structure. It has nothing to do with Islam.
That pretty much blows a hole in your assertion that I would have a hard time "naming a country where honor killing is practiced in areas where Islam is not the dominant religion." One such country is India, and the areas are Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, and especially Punjab. And it took little time to find them.
Luke 12:5 says God has the power to kill and to send whom he kills to Hell. Luke 12:9 says those who deny Christ will be denied by the angels. Matthew 12:30 says that he who is not with Christ is against Christ.
And of course Mark 16:16: "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned" (King James Bible).
None of this should be shocking considering the entire story of the New Testament is how Jesus promises eternal life to those who believe in him. Obviously, those who do not don't get eternal life. Whether that means Hell or Hades is disputable, but many passages like the Mark quote make it seem like Hell is more like it.
Ok, so you've got nothing about the Bible saying that Christians should treat others as second-class citizens (only that the Christian path leads to salvation) which the Islamists, given their history of Dhimmitude, clearly accept.
Are honor killings common in Islamic parts of the world, yes or no?
What do you mean by cultural Christianity?? There is only one kind of Christianity. Sadly many middle eastern Christians tend to be arabs first and Christians second.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.