Honour killings

[madoqua]

A British couple go 'home' (yesterday) and get killed in an 'honour' killing.

C'mon you darlings, Justify this. Culture or murder?

Or will another darling kill the post as racist?

[Skin_and_Muscle]

It doesn't half make me laugh when you decide to label us 'darlings' or other derogatory terms just because we have differing views. Wonderfully grown up of you.

In terms of the subject of the post there are some issues. Killing is wrong but there are defences to homicide. Whether there should be 'cultural' (horrid word) defences is a tough one. Do we allow the 'cultural' defence and allow with it the right for a man from Laos to escape rape by pleading the Hmong tradition of marriage by capture? Do we allow FGM to occur? If we don't have this defence, stuff like this would not be acceptable in our society, which may well seem 100% uncontentious and correct.

However, there are groups of people that this would detriment. Some 'cultural' groups' women actually practice FGM as a rite of passage and we would deny them this practice without this recognition of a 'cultural' defence. There are other instances where a practice deemed not normative to the west are deemed important and normal to others. Who are we to say that our moral framework is superior anyway when we can deny certain forms of bodily mutilation that are held to be incredibly important but at the same time legitimise stuff like breast augmentation.

Don't get me wrong, in the majority of instances FGM is horrific and incredibly damaging but I was just using it to demonstrate a point that no moral 'value' is absolute so maybe we should think twice about lauding the western morality as the right one.

[Rizzo]

I think the bit about darlings killing the post as racist was aimed at the moderators, despite the fact that we are doing our job and acting as the club require us to do.

[Bill W (2)]

Different cultures have different values.

At a trivial level Madoqua's use of "darlings" and your use (without explanation) of FGM.

We now all live in a "Global" society. So the previously accepted standards of a particular "tribe" may be at odds with the generally accepted "norm".

Even in the USA, where the term homicide is used, justifiable homicide is restricted to self defense etc and does not include "honour" killings.

In Afghanistan it apparently is acceptable to murder a British doctor because she was Christian - or at least was working for a Christian Aid Organisation. By no stretch of (my) imagination is this justifiable homicide. Nor are honour killings or stoning of adulterers (although at least the latter were convicted by what might be said to be "due process").

I would laugh. But that would merely be a way of avoiding crying.

[Skin_and_Muscle]

Sorry, on autopilot. FGM is Female Genital Mutilation.
Like I said it is pretty grim but for some it is vital to their 'cultural' systems.

One question I have; who has constructed this 'global society'? I can tell you it is the Christian-Capitalist west who have constructed it out of 100s of years of empire. The idea wasn't conceived in developing Africa, Asia, Melanesia or South America (or even, strictly speaking, North America- though they have since jumped on the bandwagon) but Netherlands, France, Portugal, UK, Spain etc.

[Kinoulton]

Perhaps I differ from others, but I am not so weak that I need to cling to some stupid "faith" to point me in the direction.

With an IQ above zero, I know that it is wrong to mutilate women's genitals, force women to live their lives with someone chosen by others, take slaves, stone a girl because she was with a different man, kill someone because their mumbo jumbo koran was different to the mumbo jumbo bible, or commit some atrocity because some b****** told me I'd be rewarded with 72 virgins and being a gullible inbred I would actually believe it.

Wrong is wrong. It is wrong to harm people unless you are absolutely forced to to it (as Brits were obliged to shoot at German planes over Hull, London, Coventry etc) but justifying horrific abuse because you wear a tea-towel on your head has no place in my world.

The sooner the UK absolutely bans all religion, the better. And if anyone wants to continue with religion, then there are any number of poverty stricken backward countries where you can go and do so.

On this subject, the hard line Russian communists had it spot on.

[madoqua]

I think that darling is a lovely word only used for special people.
Shame that predictables jump in with assumptions.
Who could I mean?
Are there more to come?

I'm sure if the post does get killed it will be done with honour.
Bless.

Kinny. My head's that big I can't get a towel round it.

P.S. Can Moat be described as an honour killer?

[Kinoulton]

Moat was a worthless :censored:.

People who commit honour killings are toss pots, and I seriously hate the way they have hijacked the perfectly good word "honour". There is no honour in it whatsoever.

I just hate the way that our middle class Guardian readers want to sit back and witness the horrors in the World and say: "Oh well that's their culture, we mustn't interfere."

Well maybe it was the South London culture for the Richardsons to kill lots of people. Maybe it was the Gloucester culture for the Wests to mollest, terrify and kill innocent children. Maybe it was simply Hitler's culture to commit genocide.

As long as it's your culture, you can do what you want then?

[madoqua]

Spot on Kinny darling.

[Bill W (2)]

One question I have; who has constructed this 'global society'? I can tell you it is the Christian-Capitalist west who have constructed it out of 100s of years of empire. The idea wasn't conceived in developing Africa, Asia, Melanesia or South America (or even, strictly speaking, North America- though they have since jumped on the bandwagon) but Netherlands, France, Portugal, UK, Spain etc.

Er, sorry. The Romans, Chinese, Moguls etc conceived of it before the Imperialist West. And the globalism of communism significantly superior to that of capitalism.

It was "our" culture to hang people by the neck until they were dead if they committed murder; cut off their hands if they stole etc.. Culture is no defense to acts of barbarism.

[Old Hob]

The idea of "honour" killings survived for a very long time in Southern Europe, Greece, Sicily and so on. Kinoulton is right about religion: if there is a moral question to be discussed in the media religious people are wheeled out as though they somehow know more than we do. "We must respect religious beliefs" is a common cry; no we mustn't - we must laugh them off the planet. FGM is torture, end of. Police are now more active in this area and not so held back by the fear of "cultural intolerance" as they were a few years ago. Any instance of FGM IS illegal and WILL be prosecuted ACPO declared 10 years ago. I hope it's true. I note that a storm was caused recently by a female dog handler searching a mosque - a faux pas on two counts. However, if she was the only officer and the search was important then so be it. I generally think the British way of tolerance compares favourably to the French intolerance and the low levels of public disorder seem to bear this out. I think the Swiss method may have value: You MUST learn the language - you CANNOT live in dense populations in one area. In the spirit of equality this must necessarily apply to Brit expats in Spain, for example, as well.

[Skin_and_Muscle]

FGM is torture, end of. Police are now more active in this area and not so held back by the fear of "cultural intolerance" as they were a few years ago. Any instance of FGM IS illegal and WILL be prosecuted ACPO declared 10 years ago.

This is a good example of what I'm saying. Torture, end of? There are women who think it is a necessary milestone in their lives. Seriously. I don't understand why but there are and they are being told what is done to them is illegal but what celebrities do by filling themselves full of poison and silicone are allowed to continue their activity.

Many of the other posts also demonstrate my point very well. The west arrogates itself as the keepers of morality and we interfere in other's lives when we need to 'save' them!
We 'saved' Iraq? We're 'saving' Afghanistan slowly and laboriously at a huge cost to the lives of civilians (it's OK though, because it is collateral damage and a necessary evil to drag them out of barbarism!) .
We also 'saved' the Chagossians by commandeering their entire Island and deporting everyone just so we could help the Americans launch extraordinary rendition from it. (These people complained to the court though and everything was sorted. They weren't allowed to go home though, they were given a little bit of compensation (what they really needed)).

Can we really take the moral high ground? Can we take it when you realise that our legal system actually categorises hyperglycaemics as insane if they commit a crime due to their illness? Or when you can get compensation for watching your house burn down due to negligence but not watching your family member die due to negligence?
I think not.

On the point about communism and capitalism, the European lead empire is the lasting global legacy and it was unbelievably fruitful and invasive. The only 'right' people had were to be brought in line and if that meant decimating certain groups to achieve our aims then we did it. We have a system based on property and money and that cannot be the morality that is imposed throughout the world, it has caused so much irrevocable damage to hundreds of millions of people.

[Bill W (2)]

Many of the other posts also demonstrate my point very well. The west arrogates itself as the keepers of morality and we interfere in other's lives when we need to 'save' them!

Can we really take the moral high ground? .

Not sure the "West" is alone in this. The West may have more fire power at the moment, but the Chinese and others were and are quite happy the assert a "rule of law". In Africa the self same attitude has lead to genocide in several places.

We can all claim the moral high ground. Although our moralities may well differ. Problems frequently become most acute when we both justify our position on religious or idealistic grounds. That is when wars and revolutions start.

[madoqua]

Eeeeeeeeee I tell you what Bill, when I go out and kill or rape, help me think up a cultural excuse and lots of big lefty words and I'll hire a darling to get me off.

This is fun!

[Ze Stade Fan]

I am amazed by the freedom of speech of this forum. Such a touchy subject would have been moderated in any forum that I know.

Speaking of honour killings, we are used to saying it's a cultural thing amongst foreigners but when an inside-family killing occurs in a good ole christian white family we put the criminal as damn crazy and that's it. I think honour in many foreign languages is just a name for paranoia.