betsy Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 Have you moved in with Oleg or something? I sputtered coffee all over the keyboard!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shwa Posted March 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 Yes....it IS worse. The insurance money example or many others are one-off crimes. Honour murders are worse because they are deemed acceptable - or at least tolerated - inside certain cultures. A vile action that has the ability to perpetuate itself through some form of acceptance or tolerance is more dangerous than a one-off crime of greed or passion.....so yes, it's worse. Kimmy already asked a few pages ago, but I'll ask again - what cultures do you think tolerate or accept honour killings? Your comment is the exact reason why Justin Trudeau stuck his foot in his mouth. Would you understand it better if it was phrased in such away as to protect your culture from honour killings? Would that make more sense to you then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shwa Posted March 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 Still waiting to hear whose culture is actually being insulted by the description of "honor killing" as barbaric. -k Perhaps it might be worthwhile to ask the editors of the Study Guide – Discover Canada The Equality of Women and MenIn Canada, men and women are equal under the law. Canada’s openness and generosity do not extend to barbaric cultural practices that tolerate spousal abuse, “honour killings,” female genital mutilation, forced marriage or other gender-based violence. Those guilty of these crimes are severely punished under Canada’s criminal laws. "barbaric cultural practices" Or you could ask yourself and do a little association. When someone mentions honour killings, genital mutilation, forced marriage - what cultures come to mind? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 Kimmy already asked a few pages ago, but I'll ask again - what cultures do you think tolerate or accept honour killings? Your comment is the exact reason why Justin Trudeau stuck his foot in his mouth. Would you understand it better if it was phrased in such away as to protect your culture from honour killings? Would that make more sense to you then? Culture is not necessarily tied to a religion or a country....but Honour Murders seem to be almost exclusively carried out under some twisted interpretation of the Koran in what I would hope are isolated pockets of this cultural "tradition". So how would one answer your question? Is it Islam? No. Is it Afghanistan or Malaysia. No. Like suicide bombers, it's people with a twisted, fanatical belief system - very rare, and very dangerous. If one can take the life of a family member, what else are they capable of? Our citizenship guide is making a clear, unmitigated statement - that Canadians find the practice of Honour Murders barbaric and if you don't like it - don't even think about coming here. There are certain things in this world that you should not try to be politically correct - that you should not play the academic armchair game of moral relevance. Murdering your brother, sister, son or daughter falls into that category. It's barbaric - and if there was an even stronger word, it would be just as appropriate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 (edited) Sounds bass-ackwards to me. That's barbaric! = I disapprove. That's unacceptable! = That ain't gonna happen on my watch! Edited March 17, 2011 by Molly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evening Star Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 I agree, Molly, which is why this 'controversy' has mystified me from the start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 It's not very complex. Not all Moslem are terrorists, but most terrorists are Moslems. Securities 'round the world at airports, subways..... and non because of Jews or Presbyterians etc. Only Moslems. It's very backward cultrure/religion. Take for example even the "very good" and "adapted" Moslem like Arar on vacation with his wife. Him on a beach in swim suit and she beside him completely wrapped up toe to head in that heat. They are NUTS! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 Judge not lest ye be judged. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 I agree, Molly, which is why this 'controversy' has mystified me from the start. It's because Trudeau did NOT say it was "unacceptable" in his radio interview - he said he was uncomfortable with the tone. It was only after the flak hit the fan that he came up with "unacceptable". That's why it was a controversy. He has since apologized so we can move on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 Judge not lest ye be judged. Keep that always in mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 Culture is not necessarily tied to a religion or a country....but Honour Murders seem to be almost exclusively carried out under some twisted interpretation of the Koran in what I would hope are isolated pockets of this cultural "tradition". So how would one answer your question? Is it Islam? No. Is it Afghanistan or Malaysia. No. Like suicide bombers, it's people with a twisted, fanatical belief system - very rare, and very dangerous. If one can take the life of a family member, what else are they capable of? This is just plain false. It is also found in India among Sikh and conservative Hindu populations. It is not a Muslim problem, it is a Central Asian problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 It's because Trudeau did NOT say it was "unacceptable" in his radio interview - he said he was uncomfortable with the tone. It was only after the flak hit the fan that he came up with "unacceptable". That's why it was a controversy. He has since apologized so we can move on. I'm not comfortable with that tone either. It's personal rather than directed at the action, and I really don't believe that it's the tone we want.... but neither do I think it's egregious enough to get excited about. He had absolutely nothing to apologize for. That nuance of tone is the sort of thing that jumps out at folks who are entertained by the examination of words. I like young Mr. Trudeau better for his having been sensitive to it. He has more wheels turning than I gave him credit for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 It's personal rather than directed at the action... Barbaric is an adverb...it is directed at the action. EOS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evening Star Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 To be pedantic, "barbaric" is an adjective. "Barbarically" is the related adverb. What's important is that "barbaric" judges/describes the act (as either "savagely cruel; exceedingly brutal" or "primitive; unsophisticated" according to OAD) while "completely unacceptable" seems to actually spell out that the act is not tolerated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shwa Posted March 17, 2011 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 (edited) Culture is not necessarily tied to a religion or a country....but Honour Murders seem to be almost exclusively carried out under some twisted interpretation of the Koran in what I would hope are isolated pockets of this cultural "tradition". So how would one answer your question? Is it Islam? No. Is it Afghanistan or Malaysia. No. Like suicide bombers, it's people with a twisted, fanatical belief system - very rare, and very dangerous. If one can take the life of a family member, what else are they capable of? Which perfectly illustrates my point had Trudeau actually had the gall to follow through and make it an issue. He was protecting you from making really, really bad judgments of a person based on what you make it "seem" or what you "would hope" wouldn't apply. But the fact is, you really don't know and thus are left with fear in ignorance. That is the prime definition of 'the soft bigotry of low expectations.' Our citizenship guide is making a clear, unmitigated statement - that Canadians find the practice of Honour Murders barbaric and if you don't like it - don't even think about coming here. There are certain things in this world that you should not try to be politically correct - that you should not play the academic armchair game of moral relevance. Murdering your brother, sister, son or daughter falls into that category. It's barbaric - and if there was an even stronger word, it would be just as appropriate. But that is not what is says, the guide says: The Equality of Women and MenIn Canada, men and women are equal under the law. Canadas openness and generosity do not extend to barbaric cultural practices that tolerate spousal abuse, honour killings, female genital mutilation, forced marriage or other gender-based violence. Those guilty of these crimes are severely punished under Canadas criminal laws. Does the above include Americans to you? How about Canadians? Edited March 17, 2011 by Shwa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 To be pedantic, "barbaric" is an adjective. "Barbarically" is the related adverb. I sit humbled Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 (edited) This is just plain false. It is also found in India among Sikh and conservative Hindu populations. It is not a Muslim problem, it is a Central Asian problem. I said "Culture is not necessarily tied to a religion or a country....but Honour Murders seem to be almost exclusively carried out under some twisted interpretation of the Koran in what I would hope are isolated pockets of this cultural "tradition"." I certainly am no expert and except for my revulsion of the practice, don't really want to know too much more. Having said that, here is a report of where Honour Murders occur (you'll note that India is not on the list but I remember a couple of cases involving sikhs)......so it would appear that my statement is reasonably accurate - although perhaps I should change it from "almost exclusively: to "the vast majority": The report of the Special Rapporteur... concerning cultural practices in the family that are violent towards women (E/CN.4/2002/83), indicated that honour killings had been reported in Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Pakistan, the Syrian Arab Republic, Turkey, Yemen, and other Mediterranean and Persian Gulf countries, and that they had also taken place in western countries such as France, Germany and the United Kingdom, within migrant communities.[13][14] Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor_killing Edited March 17, 2011 by Keepitsimple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted March 17, 2011 Report Share Posted March 17, 2011 This is just plain false. It is also found in India among Sikh and conservative Hindu populations. It is not a Muslim problem, it is a Central Asian problem. Whoever is doing it it's barbaric, pure and simple. I don't care if it's done by members of my Temple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicky10013 Posted March 18, 2011 Report Share Posted March 18, 2011 Indeed, this is the reason that hatred of certain groups is considered an aggravating factor in sentencing of violent crimes. -k So you're for hate crimes legislation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted March 18, 2011 Report Share Posted March 18, 2011 (edited) So you're for hate crimes legislation? I'm sure that you, like other long-time readers, know that I'm not. However, I'm not opposed to the idea that hate might be considered an aggravating factor during sentencing. More to the point, what I think doesn't matter that much, because our courts have already decided that it should be considered an aggravating factor during sentencing. That is, no doubt, a reflection of the principle that KIS expressed earlier. My only objection is that I doubt it is applied evenly. (ie: it's only "hate" if it's whitey doing the hating. A white guy who punches out a black woman during a heated discussion about race-relations isn't getting away with 3 days of community service and a $50 fine.) -k Edited March 18, 2011 by kimmy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saipan Posted March 18, 2011 Report Share Posted March 18, 2011 It matters very little what Trudeau actually said. He's clearly made of the hug-a-thug dough anyway. Even Jack Layton's statement has more weight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted March 19, 2011 Report Share Posted March 19, 2011 "completely unacceptable" seems to actually spell out that the act is not tolerated. I'm not comfortable with that. "Honour"-killings should be strongly condemned! No mincing about it! "Unacceptable" smacks of being lukewarm....it's kinda up there along with "inappropriate." Barbaric marks the spot! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.