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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!