Pakistani Parents Sentenced to "at least 25 years" for Honor-Killing of Daughter

[Fraggle Rocker]

One of the most interesting future-scenarios I wonder about is what will become of the Middle East when the world finally moves away from non-renewable resources. Like, when the demand for oil dries up, and nobody ever has to give a shit about what some Ayatollah or Saudi prince says, what's going to happen there?

The Arab hegemony that dominates Islam today out of sheer inertia will probably lose its power once it loses its economic superiority. The four largest Muslim-majority countries are Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nigeria. None of those is an Arab nation.

Iran, also not an Arab nation, is already flexing its muscles as a counter-influence to Arabism, since the USA so helpfully destroyed their Arab rival, Iraq. But much of Iran's economic power is also in petroleum.

 

[Gustav]

Islam-inspired murder

thats just fucking stupid

 

[seagypsy]

No one is distorting the faith. Just as in Christianity and Judaism, the warrant for atrocity can be found within its pages. Blaming it on the western media is exactly the type of irresponsible talk that needs to stop.

Are you saying that I am blaming the media for what radical Muslims do? Because I have never made such a statement. If you are going to put words in my mouth I will no longer discuss this thread with you. In case I have not been clear, I blame the people who commit the acts for their actions. Not their religion or the media or the boogy man. The people who commit the crimes are to blame for their own behavior.

thats just fucking stupid

Agreed. People have been committing murder since way before Islam and I am gonna go out on a limb and suggest we have been murdering each other since way before any organized religion ever formed. It's in our (human beings) nature to do so. Always has been and likely always will be.

 

[Balerion]

Are you saying that I am blaming the media for what radical Muslims do? Because I have never made such a statement. If you are going to put words in my mouth I will no longer discuss this thread with you. In case I have not been clear, I blame the people who commit the acts for their actions. Not their religion or the media or the boogy man. The people who commit the crimes are to blame for their own behavior.

No, you're blaming the distortion of the faith (i.e. people's understanding of it) on the Western media. In other words, you're saying we understand Islam to be a violent and intolerant faith because that's the spin the western media puts on it. I'm saying that this is incorrect; our understanding of Islam is based on the actions of Islam. We understand it to be violent and intolerant because it is.

Agreed. People have been committing murder since way before Islam and I am gonna go out on a limb and suggest we have been murdering each other since way before any organized religion ever formed. It's in our (human beings) nature to do so. Always has been and likely always will be.

Of course killing predates organized religion. And injustice predates fascism. But you wouldn't try to say that fascism isn't responsible for injustice, would you? I mean, think of what you're saying here. Stop operating from the "Must Defend Islam" mentality for a moment and actually consider the implication of your words.

 

[Gustav]

Agreed. People have been committing murder since way before Islam and I am gonna go out on a limb and suggest we have been murdering each other since way before any organized religion ever formed. It's in our (human beings) nature to do so. Always has been and likely always will be.

it is of course possible that islam can inspire one to murder but in the case of honor killings it tends to be a societal thing. the semantics usually involve.... family... culture... social status...honor...ostracism...etc and hardly ever shit like god and other divine inspired crap. it is social and cultural norms like patriarchy, women as chattel, that aid in such fucked up dispositions. it is always the bitches that do the dishonoring. guys are seemingly inviolate

 

[Gustav]

Surprised this slipped through the cracks here at Sciforums...

shit like that is usually left for the bigots
have fun trolling

 

[Balerion]

thats just fucking stupid

it is of course possible that islam can inspire one to murder

/case

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

People have been committing murder since way before Islam and I am gonna go out on a limb and suggest we have been murdering each other since way before any organized religion ever formed. It's in our (human beings) nature to do so. Always has been and likely always will be.

Reexamination of fossils with modern instruments has discovered that more than half of adults in the Paleolithic Era were killed by violence. In other words, more humans were killed by other humans than by all other causes combined.

The reason, of course, is that before the Agricultural Revolution there was no food surplus. During a bad year, each nomadic extended-family unit had to protect their hunting and gathering territory from other clans, and in addition they had to attempt to make incursions into the other clans' territories, for the sake of sheer survival. They probably killed off each other's older, weaker members first, until they realized that now there was enough food to go around.

The Neolithic Revolution changed all that, by producing surplus food. Humans no longer had reason to kill each other, and in fact there was considerable advantage in joining clans together to use division of labor and economies of scale to increase their productivity, so not only would there be plenty of food in storage for the next famine, but a few of them could take up "careers" outside the food production and distribution "industry."

Unfortunately we're still Paleolithic cavemen at heart, since the few hundred generations since the Dawn of Agriculture are not enough for us to evolve beyond that. We're still suspicious of other clans, and when no one's looking we might still steal their stuff.

 

[Balerion]

Reexamination of fossils with modern instruments has discovered that more than half of adults in the Paleolithic Era were killed by violence. In other words, more humans were killed by other humans than by all other causes combined.

The reason, of course, is that before the Agricultural Revolution there was no food surplus. During a bad year, each nomadic extended-family unit had to protect their hunting and gathering territory from other clans, and in addition they had to attempt to make incursions into the other clans' territories, for the sake of sheer survival. They probably killed off each other's older, weaker members first, until they realized that now there was enough food to go around.

The Neolithic Revolution changed all that, by producing surplus food. Humans no longer had reason to kill each other, and in fact there was considerable advantage in joining clans together to use division of labor and economies of scale to increase their productivity, so not only would there be plenty of food in storage for the next famine, but a few of them could take up "careers" outside the food production and distribution "industry."

Unfortunately we're still Paleolithic cavemen at heart, since the few hundred generations since the Dawn of Agriculture are not enough for us to evolve beyond that. We're still suspicious of other clans, and when no one's looking we might still steal their stuff.

You've really got to get over this "violence as a latent caveman behavior" bit. I've personally witnessed several members of this forum correct you on this matter, yet you're still spamming it whenever the occasion arises.

 

[seagypsy]

Reexamination of fossils with modern instruments has discovered that more than half of adults in the Paleolithic Era were killed by violence. In other words, more humans were killed by other humans than by all other causes combined.

The reason, of course, is that before the Agricultural Revolution there was no food surplus. During a bad year, each nomadic extended-family unit had to protect their hunting and gathering territory from other clans, and in addition they had to attempt to make incursions into the other clans' territories, for the sake of sheer survival. They probably killed off each other's older, weaker members first, until they realized that now there was enough food to go around.

The Neolithic Revolution changed all that, by producing surplus food. Humans no longer had reason to kill each other, and in fact there was considerable advantage in joining clans together to use division of labor and economies of scale to increase their productivity, so not only would there be plenty of food in storage for the next famine, but a few of them could take up "careers" outside the food production and distribution "industry."

Unfortunately we're still Paleolithic cavemen at heart, since the few hundred generations since the Dawn of Agriculture are not enough for us to evolve beyond that. We're still suspicious of other clans, and when no one's looking we might still steal their stuff.

Exactly, I wish I could have made my point as clearly as you have. We are animals, always have been always will be.We have instincts that we struggle against because of our bigger brains. We have logic but that inner lizard brain is still at work and to alleviate the conflict we come up with excuses to give in to it. That relieves the pressure of the instinctual lizard brain and satisfies the dominance of the logical cerebrum. Many people use religion to supply the excuses but people do not always need religion. and for those few individuals who never seem to have conflict between the two, they are usually referred to as psychopaths. but the urge and desire to kill comes from within the human brain and each and every one of us is susceptible to varying degrees to giving into it. I am not on a defend Islam kick, I am on a look at yourself in the mirror and realize that you are fully capable of being just like them kick. I think this is what must bother some people. To acknowledge that we are animals and nothing more, would mean that they are no better than those who commit terrible crimes. Each one of us has a breaking point where the lizard brain will win and we will give in to the desires we don't want to admit to having. Situations of desperation, or perceived desperation, are what makes the demands of the lizard brain seem more logical. Unfortunately some societies have evolved in such a way that they have stagnated in perpetual desperation. Western society has evolved further, but likely only because the geography of the areas we live in provide more than adequate climates for survival of large populations. If we have a dramatic climate change that makes resources scarce we will likely become just like them justifying killing by the slightest of infraction. I am not excusing their behavior. If they could only see that it is the actions they take to preserve their people that stagnates their growth and will bring more aggression against them from outsiders. Our society has the same reactions to them as they have to us. We don't want their ways infecting our society so we spread the propaganda and hate against them just as in their country their media tells them that all westerners are what they see on Jerry springer. Their media tells them about the worst members of our society and tells them they are representatives of us all. Our media does the same thing in regards to them.

 

[Balerion]

Exactly, I wish I could have made my point as clearly as you have. We are animals, always have been always will be.We have instincts that we struggle against because of our bigger brains. We have logic but that inner lizard brain is still at work and to alleviate the conflict we come up with excuses to give in to it. That relieves the pressure of the instinctual lizard brain and satisfies the dominance of the logical cerebrum. Many people use religion to supply the excuses but people do not always need religion. and for those few individuals who never seem to have conflict between the two, they are usually referred to as psychopaths. but the urge and desire to kill comes from within the human brain and each and every one of us is susceptible to varying degrees to giving into it. I am not on a defend Islam kick, I am on a look at yourself in the mirror and realize that you are fully capable of being just like them kick. I think this is what must bother some people. To acknowledge that we are animals and nothing more, would mean that they are no better than those who commit terrible crimes. Each one of us has a breaking point where the lizard brain will win and we will give in to the desires we don't want to admit to having. Situations of desperation, or perceived desperation, are what makes the demands of the lizard brain seem more logical. Unfortunately some societies have evolved in such a way that they have stagnated in perpetual desperation. Western society has evolved further, but likely only because the geography of the areas we live in provide more than adequate climates for survival of large populations. If we have a dramatic climate change that makes resources scarce we will likely become just like them justifying killing by the slightest of infraction. I am not excusing their behavior. If they could only see that it is the actions they take to preserve their people that stagnates their growth and will bring more aggression against them from outsiders. Our society has the same reactions to them as they have to us. We don't want their ways infecting our society so we spread the propaganda and hate against them just as in their country their media tells them that all westerners are what they see on Jerry springer. Their media tells them about the worst members of our society and tells them they are representatives of us all. Our media does the same thing in regards to them.

What a ridiculous wall of nonsense. For one, this cowardly tactic of arguing with me through an intermediary so as to restate your position without having to address my counterpoints is scraping the bottom of the intellectual barrel. You should be embarrassed.

Secondly, it does not follow that because we are all animals, we are all therefore capable of mass murder. There are those of us who are incapable of cruelty, who are morally and intellectually superior to those who have no problem doing evil. Just as it didn't follow in your previous post that just because killing predates religion that religion therefore does not cause killing. Even Gustav admitted that it does (which is why I don't respond to him; left to himself, he eventually gets around to disproving his own arguments for me), but you will apparently go to great lengths to avoid making such a concession.

The "We are fully capable of being just like them" kick is no less intellectually bankrupt or morally irresponsible than the "defend Islam at all costs" kick. You're wrong in either case, though let's stop pretending that your arguments here are not borne from a desire to defend your beloved Islam against criticism. Your nostalgia for the old boy is evident, the least you could do is be honest about it.

 

[seagypsy]

What a ridiculous wall of nonsense. For one, this cowardly tactic of arguing with me through an intermediary so as to restate your position without having to address my counterpoints is scraping the bottom of the intellectual barrel. You should be embarrassed.

Secondly, it does not follow that because we are all animals, we are all therefore capable of mass murder. There are those of us who are incapable of cruelty, who are morally and intellectually superior to those who have no problem doing evil. Just as it didn't follow in your previous post that just because killing predates religion that religion therefore does not cause killing. Even Gustav admitted that it does (which is why I don't respond to him; left to himself, he eventually gets around to disproving his own arguments for me), but you will apparently go to great lengths to avoid making such a concession.

The "We are fully capable of being just like them" kick is no less intellectually bankrupt or morally irresponsible than the "defend Islam at all costs" kick. You're wrong in either case, though let's stop pretending that your arguments here are not borne from a desire to defend your beloved Islam against criticism. Your nostalgia for the old boy is evident, the least you could do is be honest about it.

You know it's quite alright with me if you want to deny what humans are. That's your prerogative. I choose to acknowledge our species for what it is. Animals that have evolved but not to the extent that we are incapable of primitive behavior. I simply don't have the superiority complex that you are displaying here. Gustav did not argue against himself. He made a valid remark and his second post did contradict it at all. He acknowledged that your blanket statement that Islam inspires murder was stupid. He clarified his own statement by stating that it can in the minds of the correct people.


But since I seem to be upsetting you, and I wouldn't want to push you to the point of violating rules of the forum, I will not agree with you but I will refrain from posting further. I don't want to deprive you of your need to be right.

 

[Balerion]

You know it's quite alright with me if you want to deny what humans are. That's your prerogative. I choose to acknowledge our species for what it is. Animals that have evolved but not to the extent that we are incapable of primitive behavior. I simply don't have the superiority complex that you are displaying here.

Strawman, and I'm pretty sure now that you're aware of it. I don't deny what humans are, I simply don't subscribe to this notion that war and killing is representative of our inner caveman. But even if it were, what would that have to do with Islam's ability to inspire violence? Your position was that Islam doesn't do this. I never claimed that Islam has some magical power over people. Clearly it--like all religion--appeals to certain things within the human psyche, and exploits those weaknesses for its own purposes. If you want to call that the inner caveman, have at it. It would not change the fact that Islam is exploiting that inner caveman to do bad things.

Gustav did not argue against himself. He made a valid remark and his second post did contradict it at all. He acknowledged that your blanket statement that Islam inspires murder was stupid. He clarified his own statement by stating that it can in the minds of the correct people.

For one, saying that Islam can inspire violence is not a blanket statement, it is an observable fact. A blanket statement would be "Islam inspires violence in everyone," which is not what I said. Secondly, I find it hysterical that you would complain about this, since in your last post you made the absurd blanket statement that all humans are capable of doing what the Islamic terrorists do.

But since I seem to be upsetting you, and I wouldn't want to push you to the point of violating rules of the forum, I will not agree with you but I will refrain from posting further. I don't want to deprive you of your need to be right.

Translation: "I can't defeat your argument, so I'm going to get out of Dodge before I humiliate myself any further."

 

[seagypsy]

Strawman, and I'm pretty sure now that you're aware of it. I don't deny what humans are, I simply don't subscribe to this notion that war and killing is representative of our inner caveman. But even if it were, what would that have to do with Islam's ability to inspire violence? Your position was that Islam doesn't do this. I never claimed that Islam has some magical power over people. Clearly it--like all religion--appeals to certain things within the human psyche, and exploits those weaknesses for its own purposes. If you want to call that the inner caveman, have at it. It would not change the fact that Islam is exploiting that inner caveman to do bad things.



For one, saying that Islam can inspire violence is not a blanket statement, it is an observable fact. A blanket statement would be "Islam inspires violence in everyone," which is not what I said. Secondly, I find it hysterical that you would complain about this, since in your last post you made the absurd blanket statement that all humans are capable of doing what the Islamic terrorists do.



Translation: "I can't defeat your argument, so I'm going to get out of Dodge before I humiliate myself any further."

Whatever makes you feel better. All your arguments have been based on what you BELIEVE to be true. That's what this entire thread has been about. Your beliefs vs the beliefs of anyone who disagrees with you. Believing something to be true doesn't make it true. So basically your side is no more relevant than mine. Your beliefs are based on your limited experiences as are mine. Though I think my experience with islam and muslims has been a bit more in depth than yours. Still limited. You are living up to your primitive need to be right, because being right means you are justified in your thinking and any actions that fall in line with that thinking.

You even went so far to lie, a clear violation of forum rules. I have never stated a position claiming that Islam does not inspire violence. You may disagree with my interpretations of my experiences and that is fine. But lying about what I say is unacceptable.

 

[Balerion]

Whatever makes you feel better. All your arguments have been based on what you BELIEVE to be true. That's what this entire thread has been about. Your beliefs vs the beliefs of anyone who disagrees with you. Believing something to be true doesn't make it true. So basically your side is no more relevant than mine. Your beliefs are based on your limited experiences as are mine. Though I think my experience with islam and muslims has been a bit more in depth than yours. Still limited. You are living up to your primitive need to be right, because being right means you are justified in your thinking and any actions that fall in line with that thinking.

So now neither position is superior to the other. Yet another trope of the intellectually bankrupt. At least you're headed in the right direction. Maybe in your next post you'll have the integrity to admit your original assertion was wrong.

You even went so far to lie, a clear violation of forum rules. I have never stated a position claiming that Islam does not inspire violence. You may disagree with my interpretations of my experiences and that is fine. But lying about what I say is unacceptable.

I did no such thing. This is the crux of your argument: "A serial killer can find justification for murder in a nutrition label. That isn't the fault of the FDA or the label." You have said you blame the person, not their religion. You went on a long, inane rant about reptilian brains and human nature, even said that killing predates religion, obviously meant to convey the idea that religion does not cause killing. If you want to claim that I am misunderstanding your position, fine--though it would be dishonest of you to do so--but to say I'm lying is unacceptable. Back up your accusation with fact, or make a public retraction.

 

[seagypsy]

So now neither position is superior to the other. Yet another trope of the intellectually bankrupt. At least you're headed in the right direction. Maybe in your next post you'll have the integrity to admit your original assertion was wrong.



I did no such thing. This is the crux of your argument: "A serial killer can find justification for murder in a nutrition label. That isn't the fault of the FDA or the label." You have said you blame the person, not their religion. You went on a long, inane rant about reptilian brains and human nature, even said that killing predates religion, obviously meant to convey the idea that religion does not cause killing. If you want to claim that I am misunderstanding your position, fine--though it would be dishonest of you to do so--but to say I'm lying is unacceptable. Back up your accusation with fact, or make a public retraction.

For clarification, are you saying that I am intellectually bankrupt? You still didn't post where I said that Islam cannot inspire murder. You posted statements out of context and added your spin to it. Something Fox news tends to do. None of my own words said that Islam cannot inspire murder and you have failed to show that I did. You lied and there is no way around it.

 

[Balerion]

For clarification, are you saying that I am intellectually bankrupt?

Yes.

You still didn't post where I said that Islam cannot inspire murder. You posted statements out of context and added your spin to it. Something Fox news tends to do. None of my own words said that Islam cannot inspire murder and you have failed to show that I did. You lied and there is no way around it.

I posted your direct response to my statements. There was nothing out of context, and you have not offered a satisfactory alternative to what I have taken your words to mean. Retract your assertion that I am lying, or I will report your post.

 

[Balerion]

I should add, if you are now changing your story, and, like Gustav, now willing to admit that Islam inspires violence, then we have nothing further to discuss. I still require you to retract your bullshit claim against my integrity, but I'll spare you having to go through the humiliating machinations of explaining why you've changed course in mid-argument.

 

[seagypsy]

I should add, if you are now changing your story, and, like Gustav, now willing to admit that Islam inspires violence, then we have nothing further to discuss. I still require you to retract your bullshit claim against my integrity, but I'll spare you having to go through the humiliating machinations of explaining why you've changed course in mid-argument.

There is nothing to retract. You LIED. And you have resorted to personal insults. Do not claim to have meant something else. I already asked you to clarify and you did. You called me intellectually bankrupt and that is a personal attack. This is your usual tactic. When someone disagrees with you on a subject which is nearly impossible to prove by scientific methods, in other words, philosophical ideals or social phenomenon, you dismiss any experience or observation another person has if it contradicts your interpretation of reality. The whole of humanity cannot see through your eyes any more than they can all see through mine. I have shared your perspective in the past, but more experience and critical introspection have lead me to a different interpretation. You are welcome to justify your hatred towards whatever you choose any way you choose. I am trying to rise above hating. Your opinion is just that, an opinion, not a fact. My opinions are also just opinions. You may feel anyway you please about that. Unlike you, I will not end every argument with a demand for concession. Your opinion means little to me. Why my opinion matters to you anyway is beyond me, I'm just intellectually bankrupt in your eyes anyway.

Go ahead and report me. I am guilty of disagreeing with you and pointing out that you lied about my words.You are guilty of lying and making personal attacks. Which have both already been reported.

 

[Gustav]

the murder would not have transpired if the parents did not awaken on that fateful day
therefore there is a very strong correlation b/w wakefulness and murder

/snicker

...parents who killed their daughter for religious reasons

...Islam-inspired murder is reported by the media.

such simplistic platitudes have no place in a science forum
one would hope a supportive argument would be made that pertains to this particular case
there is none to be had except for the most insipid of generalities

thread to cess
jdawg to the boards over at aol