I draw attention to this case for the reason of its eccentricities, and in order to point out the seemingly not-quite-Middle-Ages elegance of the Jordanian court's position. How precisely is "changing her clothes" indicative of whether or not the man's sister had a boyfriend, or had sex? Because if she did, she would have to be a slut and dress accordingly? Ah. Right, the whole "uncovered meat" thingy. Gotcha. But it generates still more questions. For example: what happened to the rights of women after divorce in islamic society? The sister was divorced, not married. And what business is it of men in women's affairs? And why not instead punish the man she was sleeping with? Wouldn't that be the first recourse, rather than murdering a blood relative? Would such a man be let off here? What would be said of such a decision, if one were? (Well...there's OJ.) Clearly sharia - that Total System to Life, Death and Everything - has such intricate designs that no mortal mind could hope to understand it. And yet then why is it necessary? Clearly the legal system of Jordan is not too, ah, "penetrating", if you'll excuse the pun. And yet seemingly this is what a fair percentage of muslims wish to impose on their own communities, and/or outside them. ********************************************************** "I say, Holmes, what have you got there?" "It is the key to this entire riddle, Watson. Do you note this dropped tobacco ash, Inspector Jones?" "I do, Mr. Holmes. But what can it tell us about the identity of the man who committed this heinous crime?" "A very great deal, Inspector. You can see from the circular tumbling of the edges of the periphery of the ash that it is clearly a brand of the more loosely packed Turkish variety - as you know, things here in Jordan are wound a bit more tightly. I therefore suspect that a Turk has been involved with the disgrace of this woman, and with her eventual murder. I recommend the rounding of all Turkish emigres in the area. I think a little summary torture shall prove to the advantage of the police; a handy and scientifically proven methodology." "So long as they aren't forced to wear women's undergarments over their heads." "A regrettable necessity of law enforcement here in Jordan, Mr. Watson: an American invention, if memory serves." "But...shouldn't one perform a complete autopsy, Holmes? After all, we are dealing with a case of illegal sexual relations." "Tish tosh, Mr Watson. The case is as clear as the Kaaba on a winter's day. Besides, the sexual proclivities of the Turks are well known here in Jordan. I rather suspect that we shall find an Israeli hand behind this act; but such politics are better left to our good King, and Allah. Come, Watson! I have fresh news of idolaters in the Levites' quarter!" Exeunt
It would appear to be a political issue: Perhaps you should take it up with the king, though blaming Muslims is so much more fashionable.
Quite. This relates to my "failure of separation between mosque and state is bad for human rights" theme. Rather, perhaps there should be separation of mosque and state; which muslims am I specifically blaming here? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Regards, Geoff
Shocking. Is this terribly common in Brazil? Was there nothing more current than 1989? Is it an example of the correct application of Western jurisprudence? Did you not like the Sherlock Holmes thing? Is Exeunt an actual command in radio and television these days?
Muslim nations should make a law like America's: "The national government shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion." But of course, abolishing theocracy knocks the legs out from under Islam, and the mullahs wouldn't like that.
right, it's just one rogue king. all the other islamic countries never have stuff like this happen. the problem is islam, or rather religious law of any kind wherever on earth it happens to be taken seriously.
That's where the U.S. founding fathers were very wise in enacting that "Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion."
Hi Sam and GeoffP, Sam, your example was of a man killing his ex-wife in Brazil? This doesn’t really make a good comparison because GeoffPs’ was an example of a man killing his sister. Another bad example would be this one, from this week, 5 February 2007: 'Honour killers' expect to walk free because its in Pakistan. Now to get a better idea of what’s going on here we need to see the statistics of honor killing in Jordan, Pakistan, Brazil, India, etc… comparing these murders per Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindu, Buddhists, etc... then run an ANOVA - this should eliminate the cultural aspect and give a statistical significance per country per religion. So? Are there stats on the number of Xians, Jews, Muslims, Hindu, Buddhists, etc.. that honor kill their female blood relatives per country? I think that should help separate the effects of religions and the effects of culture? An interesting question and also maybe we can all brush up on our stats…! Michael PS: Another interesting question would be one of the justice melded out.
So??? Any Stats? I want to know if Xians in Jordan also have a propensity for honor killing. There was/is a popular case of a Lebanese-Aussie Xian kidnapping his two kids from their Canadian mother. Not that such is unusual regardless of religion but it has a twist because fathers are almost always awarded children in Lebanon - so I thought maybe ME Xians and Muslims both honor kill their female relatives and therefor it's purely a cultural phenomena? A good use of Stats no????
Dear Michael, You have a great idea, however i was wondering over what length of time should this survey be conducted? are we talking about the last year, or the last 10 years or perhaps the last 100 or 1000 years. as i am sure the results will be different on all these counts. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ take it ez zak
