I can’t call it “cultural enrichment”, because it comes from the throbbing heartland of the Culture Enrichers themselves. Still, it’s useful as reminder of what all that enrichment means for Western Civilization:
UAE to try 14-year-old on adultery charges
A 14-YEAR-OLD Arab schoolgirl who has been detained in the United Arab Emirates on a charge of adultery will appear in court later this month.
“The trial will start in spite of the age ceiling set for trials on sexual related crimes by the UAE law,” said the daily newspaper Gulf News today.
“The law states that the minimum age of suspects in crimes related to sex must be 15 years. Such cases should be conducted in special juvenile courts.
Otherwise, suspects are considered victims rather than suspects,” the daily quoted a “law expert” as saying.
On April 5, Gulf News said police in the emirate of Ajman had arrested the teenager after she met up with her boyfriend on the roof of her family home.
She has since been forced to undergo a gynaecological examination which “confirmed she was still a virgin”, the unnamed girl’s father was quoted as saying by the English-language daily.
In police custody since March 22, the girl was being held with adult women and bail has been refused for her release.
The young girl was also locked up for three days in solitary confinement in a section reserved for Emiratis.
The paper said the man involved in the case, in his mid-20s, was later arrested in a neighbouring emirate.
Hat tip: heroyalwhyness.
13 comments:
What is this girl's name? This trial must be followed and protested in an ongoing basis.
Dr. Shalit
Dr. Shalit - the name (of father or daughter) has not been released to my knowledge. In another report via Straits Times (4/5/2011), however, the following was revealed:
"The police have ruined the future of my daughter as she missed the school exam. She has been in police custody since March 22,' the father protested, adding that bail had been refused and the girl was being held with adult women.
The paper said the man involved in the case, in his mid-20s, was later arrested in in a neighbouring emirate.
'When police called me to report along with my daughter to the CID, I was clueless about what they wanted from me and from her,' said the father, whose nationality was also not disclosed." -- AFP
This dad appears to be supportive since he expresses his dismay about his fourteen year old daughter's education being ruined. My impression after reading the above is some nosey neighbor or jealous relative made an example of both the father and daughter for not following the example of their prophet to their satisfaction.
1. The girl is fourteen and not married . . .
2. still in school. . .
3. Now that she's incarcerated with adult women, she may also be victim of the male guards since she is without a male family member to protect her.
Should the girl's or her father's name get published, she may be in more danger as the family may be pressured into saving their honor. Islam breeds a very sick society!
Aside from applauding the excellent comment by heroyalwhyness, all I have to add is this:
There is no more damning condemnation that can be said than;
ISLAM DEVOURS ITS YOUNG.
For all Islam's faults-and there are many- at least it doesn't allow the slaughter of hundreds of millions of unborn children under the mantra of 'a woman's right to choose'.
I don't think any Western society has the right to feel superior when this 'holocaust' is allowed by law.
Anglichan: For all Islam's faults-and there are many- at least it doesn't allow the slaughter of hundreds of millions of unborn children under the mantra of 'a woman's right to choose'.
What about a woman's "right to choose" her husband? All too often, young Muslim women are killed before they can even get pregnant and, even then, more of them die because they are pregnant by some unapproved boyfriend or spouse.
This does not even address the pre-adolescent young Muslim girls who die of internal hemorrhaging after spending their wedding night with an adult husband who expects her to be able to accommodate him like a mature woman.
Is it better that these women die in droves while you wallow in your smug pseudo-moral superiority over how Western civilization has erred on the side of caution with respect to women's rights?
The mere fact that you are a woman and vomiting forth such patent nonsense paints you as a particularly malicious sort of gender traitor.
I don't think any Western society has the right to feel superior when this 'holocaust' is allowed by law.
Do you drive a car? Do you know how to read or is someone reading this blog to you? Are you allowed to go outside without a male relative escorting you? Do you like to go swimming in a bikini at a beach full of families? Do you have the right to file charges of spousal abuse? Do you not need four male witnesses in order to prove a charge of rape? Is your court testimony worth the same as a man? Is the loss of your life worth more than a man losing one of his legs?
Finally, it is telling beyond measure that you have carefully avoided providing this web site with an honest answer ― presuming that you are capable of giving one ― to the question posed by cliffarroyo as to whether there is "… any Muslim majority society that … you would personally want to live in?"
Please feel free to answer that one question. In the meanwhile, I suggest that you take careful stock of your deeply hypocritical cultural and moral relativism.
From all indications, you are a free woman living in a free society. One that was more than likely established and kept free through White men, or men of some sort, shedding their blood and losing their lives in order for you to enjoy the privilege of spewing this total rubbish.
Yeesh!
Anglichan: For all Islam's faults-and there are many- at least it doesn't allow the slaughter of hundreds of millions of unborn children under the mantra of 'a woman's right to choose'.
What about a woman's "right to choose" her husband? All too often, young Muslim women are killed before they can even get pregnant and, even then, more of them die because they are pregnant by some unapproved boyfriend or spouse.
This does not even address the pre-adolescent young Muslim girls who die of internal hemorrhaging after spending their wedding night with an adult husband who expects her to be able to accommodate him like a mature woman.
Is it better that these women die in droves while you wallow in your smug pseudo-moral superiority over how Western civilization has erred on the side of caution with respect to women's rights?
The mere fact that you are a woman and vomiting forth such patent nonsense paints you as a particularly malicious sort of gender traitor.
I don't think any Western society has the right to feel superior when this 'holocaust' is allowed by law.
Do you drive a car? Do you know how to read or is someone reading this blog to you? Are you allowed to go outside without a male relative escorting you? Do you like to go swimming in a bikini at a beach full of families? Do you have the right to file charges of spousal abuse? Do you not need four male witnesses in order to prove a charge of rape? Is your court testimony worth the same as a man? Is the loss of your life worth more than a man losing one of his legs?
All of the foregoing are examples of how Islam treats women worse than animals. Yet you have the temerity to state that you "don't think any Western society has the right to feel superior".
Are you really that clueless?
Finally, it is telling beyond measure that you have carefully avoided providing this web site with an honest answer ― presuming that you are capable of giving one ― to the question posed by cliffarroyo as to whether there is "… any Muslim majority society that … you would personally want to live in?"
Please feel free to answer that one question. In the meanwhile, I suggest that you take careful stock of your deeply hypocritical cultural and moral relativism.
From all indications, you are a free woman living in a free society. One that was more than likely established and kept free through White men, or men of some sort, shedding their blood and losing their lives in order for you to enjoy the privilege of spewing this total rubbish.
Yeesh!
Anglichan
If millions are being aborted, that's millions that would contribute to an already over populated planet. Yes abortion should be the last resort and yes western society is too decadent and should reign in it's excesses but I would still take it a hundred times over before I would submit to Islam.
Killing a daughter for 'honour' is a hundred times worse than aborting a foetus. If you put religious teachings aside for a minute and look at it purely from a compassionate view, you will see there is a world of difference.
"I don't think any Western society has the right to feel superior when this 'holocaust' is allowed by law."
I am strongly against abortion laws and attitudes as they currently stand in many Western societies and I am critical of Islam. So where is the problem.
Then again I am not "Western society" but nor is anyone else.
Maturecheese said...
Killing a daughter for 'honour' is a hundred times worse than aborting a foetus.
Where do you get the 100 figure from? How does that factor change as the baby matures and are we back the 1:1 at birth?
Your moral certainty impresses me.
For all Islam's faults-and there are many- at least it doesn't allow the slaughter of hundreds of millions of unborn children under the mantra of 'a woman's right to choose'.
I don't think any Western society has the right to feel superior when this 'holocaust' is allowed by law.
This is a very amatuerish attempt to silence argument about Islam and Abortion by drawing moral equivlance betwen Islam (which we fight) and the horror of Abortion (which we supposedly encourage). I will grant you that what you described is a terrible thing. However, your argument has several flaws, indicative of the same moral equivalence mindset that plagues the 'modern progressive' (an oxymoron if I've ever heard one) which can somehow draw the conclusion that Hammas and George Washington were doing the same thing when it is more than obvious by any reasonable standard, they were as different as starships and weasels.
First, let us describe abortion portion of the argument. This is not Western Civilization, but is part of the PC Multicultural, otherwise known as Marxism, that is dead set on its eventual destruction. It's part of that virus that's using our own vulnerabilities and goodness against us to destroy us. The entire philosophy behind abortion on demand is pushed by radical feminists of the kind described by Karl Marx as being required to collapse and destroy Western Civilization, but in itself is NOT Western Civilization.
Granted, we need to clean our own house. Make no mistake about that, and that is coming.
Next part is that while something bad is happening over here, we should not condemn something bad over there. I believe this is an example of Continuum Fallacy, though there might be another more applicable one. This basically says that as long as there is similarity between two objects we cannot consider them distinct. In this case both are very bad things, Islam and Abortion, but because we're supposedly not doing something about one, in fact we're supposedly encouraging it by your argument, we are not allowed to do something about the other. Taken to its conclusion, the argument implies that a man who fights Islam has to fight all other wrongs simultaneously on all fronts. Show me the man who can do this, and you'll have shown me the 2nd coming of Christ, though I'm not even sure God can do that in human form, despite God's supposed omnipotence and omniscience, without breaking the being's own rules, and thus making the universe irrational. Taken another way, and we'll use just abortion and islam as the examples, if a man were to dedicate himself totally to fighting the ummah, he would not be allowed to do so if he were not also completely dedicated to totally fighting abortion. This is physically impossible since a human cannot be in more than one place at one time, as the man in question is completely dedicating to bringing down the Mohammedian cult. Taken a third way one cannot fight Islam one day and Abortion the next, as one must be completely dedicated. I'm sure you can see the inherent contradiction demonstrated between comparing the second and third scenarios in that you can either fight one thing all the time, or fight several things at once by apportioning your CPU cycles accordingly on a per time slot basis...you cannot fight everything all the time.
And finally, while I do not ascribe to this personally, as I believe both are reprehensible, it fails to take into account the idea that a man may not think that abortion is all that bad, but find that Islam is everying thing evil (this would be an example of another type of fallacy, but I'll leave it to someone else to describe that one). The final example would be what we would call an alliance of convenience if we have to destroy Islam before we clean our own house. In this situation we would fight with the man against Islam and once done fight against the man concerning abortion. This could be applied in regards to the third scenario whereby time is being apportioned to either abortion (we'd fight him) or Islam (we'd ally with him). Which neatly wraps around to the Contiuum Fallacy of your arguement. I agree with the ascertation that both are bad things (some would not, however I did not agree to that), but they are separate bad things. As for me, I can only fight either of them when I can fight them; no one man is capable of fighting all things all the time on all fronts...even if it's on a moment by moment basis (also known as multitasking), we can only deal with the issue we're dealing with at that moment.
This is often why I do not argue with people. They tend to get emotional, shout you down, and claim victory when you can't get a word in edge wise, especially when you try to explain their logical fallacies. Also going point by point in an argument riddled with them is exhuastive...just look at this for barely a few lines of text. I figured I'd toss this one out since it was concerning two issues that I find very personal.
Regarding abortion: I look forward to the day that abortion can be phased out, because there are some ethical issues, as well as being a physical and emotional health hazard to women and anyone else who is involved.
That said, for the time being, abortion is a necessary evil. Teaching abstinence to young people is not foolproof birth control. Some young people will have sex, no matter what people tell them.
One way to eliminate abortion is to deal with it pragmatically. Instead of relying on abstinence education, why not offer young people an alternative, such as easily available birth control and sex education? That way, at least some abortions can be prevented.
In the long run, this issue can be resolved by technology and education. Abstinence is only feasible for some people. That's why this whole subject is referred to as "the facts of life."
Anglichan,
While there are some variations in Islam, generally Islam does permit abortion.
Islam definitely allows infanticide.
Post a Comment
All comments are subject to pre-approval by blog admins.
Gates of Vienna's rules about comments require that they be civil, temperate, on-topic, and show decorum. For more information, click here.
Users are asked to limit each comment to about 500 words. If you need to say more, leave a link to your own blog.
Also: long or off-topic comments may be posted on news feed threads.
To add a link in a comment, use this format:
<a href="http://mywebsite.com">My Title</a>
Please do not paste long URLs!
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.