[Fekay]

Fatema-the-resplendent, on 31 January 2012 - 10:39 AM, said:

Br Fekay
You have a habit of telling us the 'technicalities' which all of us can not disagree on. Yes we know the primitive nature of Men in patriarchal value systems. We also know females have been victimised all those years. We are not here to discuss this issue-we all know this.

Yes, I was sure everyone was aware. Point being it’s a paradigm which has been in repetition for long time; same factors involved, and you guys pretending to be oblivious, Like it’s a one way street.

Quote

We are condenming such practices simply because they are inhumane and unislamic but you have not passed judgement on that YET. Your choice of words is confusing, we would rather like a person with a heart say bad to bad, simple. It does not sit well in this century to still find a way to blame the victim.

Condemnation is kind of an oxymoron; one shouldn’t have to plaster the page with emotionally inane comments to get the point across! It’s a technical issue which need to be viewed from different angles for a better understanding. And i don't think we should be talking about what fits well in what centuray, it's just extending a non point.

What gets me is, if the parents were so bent, enough to hold a mentality as honour killings; then how the girls find it within themselves to take equally extreme, conflicting steps? Both ill of Islamic values; both extreme, both sides of the same coin; one obviously had it coming especially since all this from a family rooting down to Afghanistan where stoning is still pretty popular practice.

Were the girls aware their parents held such mentality before hand? Probably NOT; but logic would argue they would-of thought out a confrontation scenario beforehand but obviously slight miscalculation.

Quote

A person can not live in fear simply because of the consequences, the human mind is more complex than that. What works better is praise, reward, dialogue, negotiation etc. The parents need to use this very effective tool if they want their Daughters to behave.

Very vague; overall I agree but in this case you’re just trying to squeeze IN an argument by over-stretching the issue. No one was living in fear! Remember, we’re talking about girls who weren’t just ignorant of cultural roots but also ill of Islamic boundaries. STILL no reason one should be killed but when extremes clash people die.

For referance: Culture is bad Islam is good.

[Fekay]

Know-The-Ledge, on 31 January 2012 - 11:09 AM, said:

Fekay does your illuminated sage self agree with the killing of the female in question....yes or no?

If no, then rather than pontificating on the psychology and nuances of the behaviour, wouldn't it be more befitting that you instead call these culprits and others with such egregious tendencies to that same higher moral standard?

please answer...

I was the only one who said BOTH were extreme. I think it would be more befitting if we all painted a balanced picture.

[Fatema-the-resplendent]

What gets me is, if the parents were so bent, enough to hold a mentality as honour killings; then how the girls find it within themselves to take equally extreme, conflicting steps? (Fekay)

I am compelled to answer your strange rebuttal which still lacks condemnation of a brutal act. Strange.

How can two groups of different exposure and mentality and AGE not conflict in projection of what is right for both?
hormones play a big role in growing up and plays havoc with our minds. Attraction to opposite sex, talking to girls or boys-Parents must deal with this process in a young persons life with talking, supporting whilst being assertive. One must forgive a slip up, just as we forgive the boys.

I am sure you think differently to your Parents and your Children will think different to you, it is evolution due to exposure of society and knowledge. They will be able to justify their stances based on Religion too, just as Scholars differ in the role of women in society as do ordinary people. Every generation requires a different method to prescribe a form of acceptable moral conduct, violence and killing is not the answer.

A Side note: I read today that 87% of Afghan Women report some form of abuse, physical, sexual, and forced marriages.

This post has been edited by Fatema-the-resplendent: 31 January 2012 - 01:45 PM

[Fekay]

Fatema-the-resplendent, on 31 January 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

What gets me is, if the parents were so bent, enough to hold a mentality as honour killings; then how the girls find it within themselves to take equally extreme, conflicting steps? (Fekay)

I am compelled to answer your strange rebuttal which still lacks condemnation of a brutal act. Strange.

How can two groups of different exposure and mentality and AGE not conflict in projection of what is right for both?
hormones play a big role in growing up and plays havoc with our minds. Attraction to opposite sex, talking to girls or boys-Parents must deal with this process in a young persons life with talking, supporting whilst being assertive. One must forgive a slip up, just as we forgive the boys.

I am sure you think differently to your Parents and your Children will think different to you, it is evolution due to exposure of society and knowledge. They will be able to justify their stances based on Religion too, just as Scholars differ in the role of women in society so do ordinary people. So the point is that each generation requires a differing method to prescribe a form of acceptable moral conduct, violence and killing is not the answer.

I agree with your post; a perfect example of how extremes eventually clash. But do remember BOTH are extremes. I think both deserve equal condemnation. What users here have demostrated IS an-inability to recognise ONE whilst emotionally plastering the other.

[Fekay]

Fatema-the-resplendent, on 31 January 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

A Side note: I read today that 87% of Afghan Women report some form of abuse, physical, sexual, and forced marriages.

[/font][/size]

87% of what figure?

[Know-the-Ledge]

Fekay, on 31 January 2012 - 01:11 PM, said:

I was the only one who said BOTH were extreme. I think it would be more befitting if we all painted a balanced picture.

Understand? Understand the other? Understand how someone can falsely and inextricably link the soul of their very existence to what their women carry between their legs? Do the men have a right to arogate this level of fanatacism over their women? This is an extreme of a fabled tapestry of 'honour' which needs to be consgined to the dustbin of jahliya and condemned at every opportunity, it deserves nothing of understanding but rebuking; why should we try to understand something which The Prophet salAllahu 'alahi wasalam himself destroyed? It is idle worship of female genatalia by masked-men who are cowards; women are terrfied of benignly talking to a man at work or a customer because of what the cowards they live with are going to call them.

I would much rather my daughter talk to a boy licentiously than me murder her for doing so; get over this 'ownership' complex, as no human being alive has the right to arogate judge, jury and executioner on no one else. If anyone needs to understands, it's adults who need to understand paradigms and contort with them, not against them.

The muder was extreme, not talking to the boy, that's a human failing and folly, it is a crime of Vice, not the murder of someone elses right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Fekay what you're saying is like saying "tough shit" to someone who happened to drive without a seat belt which was a cause of their demise in an accident and then arguing the point that they should've worn a seat-belt, it's insensitive and crass; God help me if people started murdering me for the follys and failings i've committed because it goes against their sensibilities, that's what Hitler did and God save us from these islaminaties, these cultural-Hitlers.

[Know-the-Ledge]

You are asking us to understand why someone murdered their daughter? That's like opening a door for a girl, taking the plaudits as she thanks you and smiles for your chivalry, but in reality you only wanted to check her arse out as she walks past you; why one Earth should I open the door to these technicalities to look at their arse?

[Desert-Sheikh]

Fekay, on 31 January 2012 - 01:51 PM, said:

I agree with your post; a perfect example of how extremes eventually clash. But do remember BOTH are extremes. I think both deserve equal condemnation. What users here have demostrated IS an-inability to recognise ONE whilst emotionally plastering the other.

Brother, this case is different than the Mumtaz-Qadri and Salman-Taseer case where seculars and roshan-khiyal completely turned a blind eye to Salman-Taseer's crime, and failed to condem that both were extreme and equally criminal, but in this cae, the girl is only answerable to Allah for what she wore or did. Parents could boycott her or disown her but they didn't have any right to take her life, not even an islamic court could issue a death penalty in this case. Dialogue was the only solution but how could family carry out this moral-discussion with her when she was a result of their own upbringing.

Ps: Girls only start going outside of their home to find 'peace' when home becomes 'hell' due to their father or brothers behavior and attitude. (almost 95%).

[Know-the-Ledge]

Desert-Sheikh, on 31 January 2012 - 02:19 PM, said:

Ps: Girls only start going outside of their home to find 'peace' when home becomes 'hell' due to their father or brothers behavior and attitude. (almost 95%).

Exactly!! They get punched in the face repeatedly and when they ask them to stop or seek solace away from the familial disquiet they get punched harder for speaking up lol that's the only thing we need to understand here; not why murderors murder. It's not two extremes, it's just plain and utter jahliya sourced from a soul that is decaying and dead that thinks it owns the female.

This post has been edited by Know-The-Ledge: 31 January 2012 - 02:59 PM

[Ashiq--e--Rasool]

Desert-Sheikh, on 31 January 2012 - 02:19 PM, said:

Brother, this case is different than the Mumtaz-Qadri and Salman-Taseer case where seculars and roshan-khiyal completely turned a blind eye to Salman-Taseer's crime, and failed to condem that both were extreme and equally criminal, but in this cae, the girl is only answerable to Allah for what she wore or did. Parents could boycott her or disown her but they didn't have any right to take her life, not even an islamic court could issue a death penalty in this case. Dialogue was the only solution but how could family carry out this moral-discussion with her when she was a result of their own upbringing.

Ps: Girls only start going outside of their home to find 'peace' when home becomes 'hell' due to their father or brothers behavior and attitude. (almost 95%).

You stole my words. Where in the hell parents have right to kill their kids(esp girls) when the reason for their behaviors could be the parents themself.

[Fekay]

Know-The-Ledge, on 31 January 2012 - 02:08 PM, said:

Understand? Understand the other? Understand how someone can falsely and inextricably link the soul of their very existence to what their women carry between their legs? Do the men have a right to arogate this level of fanatacism over their women? This is an extreme of a fabled tapestry of 'honour' which needs to be consgined to the dustbin of jahliya and condemned at every opportunity, it deserves nothing of understanding but rebuking; why should we try to understand something which The Prophet salAllahu 'alahi wasalam himself destroyed? It is idle worship of female genatalia by masked-men who are cowards; women are terrfied of benignly talking to a man at work or a customer because of what the cowards they live with are going to call them.

I agree with this; but totally beside the point. I’m not propagating any extreme; both need condemnation.

Quote

I would much rather my daughter talk to a boy licentiously than me murder her for doing so; get over this 'ownership' complex, as no human being alive has the right to arogate judge, jury and executioner on no one else. If anyone needs to understands, it's adults who need to understand paradigms and contort with them, not against them.

Well the Afghani parents clearly didn’t share you view; an inability in both is the cause of final result; I just don’t buy the notion of recognising one extreme to plaster the other. I do share you view of judge, jury and executioner; people don’t hold the right, yes. But it happens therefore we must address the cause.

Quote

The muder was extreme, not talking to the boy, that's a human failing and folly, it is a crime of Vice, not the murder of someone elses right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Mixed threads.

Quote

Fekay what you're saying is like saying "tough shit" to someone who happened to drive without a seat belt which was a cause of their demise in an accident and then arguing the point that they should've worn a seat-belt, it's insensitive and crass; God help me if people started murdering me for the follys and failings i've committed because it goes against their sensibilities, that's what Hitler did and God save us from these islaminaties, these cultural-Hitlers.

I don’t agree with the murders; but I think it’s rather fools thinking to give ONE-WRONG a free ride to justification whilst holding the other to trial. Both need to dispense for fault.

Regarding the seatbelt analogy, not accurate. I’d go with drunk drivers; I wouldn’t say “tough shit” but if the seatbelts were the major factor then I’d say you’ve played a major part in own demise. Same with drunk drivers.

Quote

You are asking us to understand why someone murdered their daughter? That's like opening a door for a girl, taking the plaudits as she thanks you and smiles for your chivalry, but in reality you only wanted to check her arse out as she walks past you; why one Earth should I open the door to these technicalities to look at their arse?

Strange lol, that’s an extreme technicality. But I was referring to a rather basic one. Understand the problem.

• Daughter transgressed the ethical boundaries set by Islam. – WRONG.
  
• Parent killed daughters. - VERY WRONG.

Both are results of extremes totally opposite-end of the spectrum, each to the other. Maybe tad neutrality would of saved the lives.
My point is the cause, not weather it’s wrong or very wrong.

Quote

Brother, this case is different than the Mumtaz-Qadri and Salman-Taseer case where seculars and roshan-khiyal completely turned a blind eye to Salman-Taseer's crime, and failed to condem that both were extreme and equally criminal, but in this cae, the girl is only answerable to Allah for what she wore or did. Parents could boycott her or disown her but they didn't have any right to take her life, not even an islamic court could issue a death penalty in this case. Dialogue was the only solution but how could family carry out this moral-discussion with her when she was a result of their own upbringing.

Ps: Girls only start going outside of their home to find 'peace' when home becomes 'hell' due to their father or brothers behavior and attitude. (almost 95%).

I’m arguing the effect brother; these might NOT be extreme from a neutral point-of view but they were extreme from eachs-own prospective. One was extreme to other.

Daughter thinks parents are extreme for no letting her date boys.
Parents are flabbergasted that the daughter would even think or do such a thing.

So one leads to the other. And I to an extent agree with you PS note. I think it's might be the casse for some but NOT for many; if parent are too strict on haram then it doesn't make a valid argument to justify their wrong with another wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right. Rather on many cases neutral parents would find their daughter committing much more haram then those with strict zero tolorance policy. I know cus i've seen it!

[Fatema-the-resplendent]

Br Fekay

What you are saying, 'Don't do haram things with strict parents around since your killing will be partly your fault as you have invited their wrath even though you are young and inexperienced and belong to a different mindset to your parents; and because you are a girl you've got no chance of fighting this as your gender means you should intrinsically know not to behave immorally?

Can we ban people for saying stupid things?

This post has been edited by Fatema-the-resplendent: 31 January 2012 - 04:36 PM

[MVA]

Fekay

Someone who condemns the murders, doesnt automatically condone the wrongful behaviour of the girls. Put it into context, 'murder' vs 'people commiting sins' - its hardly in the same boat is it?

(Sorry, im short on time, else i would have written a detailed response)

[Fekay]

Fatema-the-resplendent, on 31 January 2012 - 03:51 PM, said:

Br Fekay

What you are saying, 'Don't do haram things with strict parents around since your killing will be partly your fault as you have invited their wrath even though you are young and inexperienced and belong to a different mindset to your parents; and because you are a girl you've got no chance of fighting this as your gender means you should intrinisically know not to behave immorally?

Can we ban people for saying stupid things?

NOPE, what I’m saying is, and have been saying for 2 pages is don’t counter an extreme with another extreme. End result will be fault of both. And anyway it's NOT stupid, just an opinion.

Quote

Fekay

Someone who condemns the murders, doesnt automatically condone the wrongful behaviour of the girls. Put it into context, 'murder' vs 'people commiting sins' - its hardly in the same boat is it?

(Sorry, im short on time, else i would have written a detailed response)

And viceversa.

Not in the same boat but one doesn't cancel the other one out. Both are wrong but one was the cause of other. Cause - Thats my point!
Anyway i think we're just going to runnig in circuls as you guys don't actually understand my point.

Case rested.

[Know-the-Ledge]

Fatema-the-resplendent, on 31 January 2012 - 03:51 PM, said:

Br Fekay

What you are saying, 'Don't do haram things with strict parents around since your killing will be partly your fault as you have invited their wrath even though you are young and inexperienced and belong to a different mindset to your parents; and because you are a girl you've got no chance of fighting this as your gender means you should intrinsically know not to behave immorally?

Can we ban people for saying stupid things?

I've also read Fekays response further below, he's saying exactly this but seems either naive or blinkered to it.

The sin invited the naked aggression, a cause and effect....so it's partly the sinners fault and for that we should be passionless in our condemnation of the murderors!(?)

It's an attempt at mitigating culpability and advances a notion of provocation...poppycock. It was a cold blooded murder, not rooted in a noble crusade but bruised egos and damaged 'honour'.

Men need to connect their honour more with what they have themselves and not assert themselves on women to feed their egos. The hypocrisy sticks, you can bet like a bear craps in the woods and wipes his bottom with a fluffy white rabbit that no such rules of honour apply to the males in the same household, it never does...with all such cases the men are slags but seem to grow a conscious when it comes to the girls in their family. My sister found her own husband through friends, he came and asked for her hand and God bless my dad who discussed and agreed amiably. Family whispered and murmured but we couldn't give a damn, you know whym Because she was only seeking happiness. It's cultural jahliya to hound and harangue the women. Koi gunnah nahein kiya this girl in question, if the family can murder her, then you bet they were like animals in other ways too, she died seeking happiness, is that such a crime worthy of being effaced? No! It's not.

It's not emotional tantrums Fekay it is the infuriating anger of a lost generation who are fed up of the cultural hitlers who think they're big fish, when they're not even fish they're just islaminaties.

This post has been edited by Know-The-Ledge: 31 January 2012 - 05:01 PM