Obfuscating Honor Killings
While tying herself in knots, Nadia a Shahram blames the media, “negative images and misperceptions about Islam” and the kitchen sink. Naturally, her defense of Islam includes a fair bit of tu quoque, (you do it too) in relation to domestic violence, generously glossing over the fact that we have laws protecting women whereas Islam sanctions violence against women:
“Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus view honor and morality as a collective family matter. Rights are collective, not individual. Family, clan and tribal rights supplant individual human rights”
Nadia Shahram is an attorney with a private practice in divorce mediation, and an adjunct at the University at Buffalo Law School.
Mohammedans are not allowed to criticize Islam. In order to defend the faith, they are obliged to obfuscate, deny and lie about those unpleasant suras in the Koran that could alarm non Muslims to the barbarity of the cult. This whitewashing technique is called kitman & taqiyya, and that is what Nadi a Shahram is doing in her lengthy essay here in the Buffalo News:
Every semester my students have a hard time keeping a straight face when I speak of Islam as a proto-feminist movement and prophet Mohammad as a visionary champion of women’s rights. These are historical facts, but non-Muslims generally do not see this because of the badly distorted view of Muslims and the Muslim religion as portrayed in today’s world.
The justification offered for honor killings all along has been the unfounded claim that Islam as a religion sanctions these heinous crimes. But a close examination of the Quran and interpretations of this religious text shows that honor killings are not religiously sanctioned acts, but rather are manifestations of an extremely patriarchal and perhaps misogynist culture.
Although no verse in the Quran mentions or encourages such acts of violence against girls and women, there are some verses that have been widely interpreted by backward-thinking Muslims as making women the possessions or property of men. Even though there is no justification for honor killings in the Quran, the perpetrators of these killings and their supporters always justify the killings by a deeply rooted cultural belief that it is men’s religious right to punish “their” women (as their property) for perceived transgressions.
The holy Quran, when read and interpreted correctly, never justifies the killing of a female family member. Starting in mid-sixth century Arabia, verses such as 2:223,4:3 and 4:34, given to limit abuse of women and to protect them, are indeed being used to subjugate in the 21st century. Therefore, reinterpretation of these verses is a vital part in eliminating these brutal practices.
It is up to us as Muslims to change this negative image, not by getting offended by the labeling of honor killings, but by eradicating the roots of such cultural beliefs perpetuated by the patriarchal interpretation of verses in the Quran that men are “in charge of women.” More from Buffalo News
Robert Spencer explains:
Honor killing is broadly tolerated in the Islamic world. No one, of course, dares to confront the root of the problem by pointing out such inconvenient truths as the fact that a manual of Islamic law certified by Al-Azhar as a reliable guide to Sunni orthodoxy says that “retaliation is obligatory against anyone who kills a human being purely intentionally and without right.” However, “not subject to retaliation” is “a father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring’s offspring.” (‘Umdat al-Salik o1.1-2).
In other words, someone who kills his child incurs no legal penalty under Islamic law. In accord with this, in 2003 the Jordanian Parliament voted down on Islamic grounds a provision designed to stiffen penalties for honor killings. Al-Jazeera reported that “Islamists and conservatives said the laws violated religious traditions and would destroy families and values.”
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
‘interpreted by backward thinking muslims’ .
Is there any other?