Another inconvenient truth...
.
Why aren't feminists - especially radical feminists and radical gay activists - all over the 'Islamization' of Western culture, not to mention actively and consistently protesting Sharia capital punishment for adultery, indecency, and homosexuality? Why do they attack the Roman Catholic Church as the great oppressor of human rights, focusing upon perennial teaching which charitably explains why women can't be ordained and that homosexual acts are sinful? The Vatican has condemned the atrocities which take place under Sharia, yet the enemies of the Church condemn and demonize the Holy Father and call him a criminal for teaching the Gospel and guarding faith and morals. It makes no sense.
.
VATICAN CITY — The Vatican on Sunday raised the possibility of using behind-the-scenes diplomacy to try to spare the life of an Iranian widow sentenced to be stoned for adultery. (Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani was convicted in 2006 of adultery; mother of two could still face execution by hanging for adultery and other offenses.) - Jerusalem Post
.
VATICAN CITY — An Iranian widow sentenced to death by stoning for alleged adultery has reportedly been lashed 99 times after what was said to be a picture of her without a headscarf appeared in a newspaper. - Read more.
.
This is Paris - will it be NYC or Dearborn. Read more.
.
Photo: Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, a widow facing the death penalty for alleged adultery, is said to have been lashed for indecency..
20 comments:
I think it's because they're all in collusion against the Church, because that is where the fullness of Truth resides. Why should feminists really care about what happens in Islam countries anyway? They're basically on the same side - neither truly care about women.
Great Post! I'm going to post a link at LOVE IN THE RUINS. God Bless.
Terry: Why aren't feminists - especially radical feminists and radical gay activists - all over the 'Islamization' of Western culture, not to mention actively and consistently protesting Sharia capital punishment for adultery, indecency, and homosexuality?
There you go with sweeping generalizations once again. First, "Islamization" is a cooked up word that implies take over of western culture and ethical norms. What Moslems actually want is some accommodation and acceptance of their values and culture as it applies to them within western societies. That's not an unreasonable request.
As for your general category of "radical feminists and radical gay activists," I haven't hear one word of support from any feminists or gays for the many barbaric, tribal laws and customs of eastern nations that operate under cover of the term "Sharia Law."
Far apart from Islam, the Roman Catholic Church has it's own bill to pay as the "great oppressor of human rights" in both older and later History. Islamic barbarism and church immorality are what they are by themselves, and they stand by themselves for all to see: feminists and gays of all stripes, and you and me.
Well said, Robert.
You might be interested in this post.
Peace,
Michael
I've lived in several Middle-Eastern countries, including Saudi Arabia..alot of the women's dress is locally based on custom, tradition, and cultural interpretation.
In Saudi as I ws betting fitted for my abaya I was asking questions of the woman shopkeeper as to the "rules". The Arab women were covered yet many 3rd country national such as Philippinos were not...well..servants do not have to be coverede becasue they are SERVANTS-i ie I guess not real people...
As for me she recommended that I wear a veil that also covered my eyes--it is a lite black material that yes you can actually see through. She suggested that I do that because I have gorgeous blue eyes-- a rarity in Saudi--and that would cause men to stare--an occasion of sin,to put it in Catholic terms.
I lived in Turkey for almost two years and there since it is a secular country under secular law headscarves are not permitted by workers in public office, or surdents that attend university. Their rationale is they don't want religious "intrusion" in the secular runnings of the country. There is freedom of religion in the country, and you will see various forms of dress in the streets, and especially when you get more inland.
In those countries, it is "do as the Romans" do....and America it should be the same. You can wear whatever you want in your private quarters--however when particular religious or personal beliefs inbtrude upon human rights then they should be looked at.
We have our own share of veiled and/or covered women...religious nuns and sisters of various congregations, and Amish, Mennonite, and some Pentecostals wear various head coverings/bonnets/scarves for their modesty....I'm sure there are more..
Sara
Michael, As ever, thanks again for reading and commenting - you certainly add color to my posts.
Please do not take this personally when I tell you that your post you link to in your comment is way over the top - comparing the Catholic Church to Islam and Sharia. When I referred to rad-femmes I had in mind the woman priest movement as well, and they frequently make the same assertions you do.
But I have to ask again - why aren't dissenting, peace and justice Catholics working to change Islam, an ideology which really does continue to promote barbaric religious practices in the 21st century? Islam continues to maim and kill people in our day. When is the last time the Catholic Church even advocated for the death penalty, or burned anyone at the stake? I'm incredulous that you do not see how unreasonable and irrelevant your post is.
Robert - Thanks for the comment. Obviously you disagree with my post, and you are welcome to do so - I appreciate contrary opinions and will often correct myself when I believe I am in error.
However, as you must be aware, generalizations get attention - one hears them all of the time from people in politics and our current administration.
With all due respect, I was not aware that there was a ban on 'new' words in the English language. Islamization is a political movement, in Europe as well as the US. Certainly in Europe they know this, as recent news reports point out.
"The Vatican on Sunday raised the possibility of using behind-the-scenes diplomacy to try to spare the life of an Iranian widow sentenced to be stoned for adultery."
I am glad to see that the Vatican is trying to help in this situation. The problem isn't that there aren't people who want to help. It's how do they do it in such a way as to not make matters worse? The Taliban and those like them are not known for their willingness to listen to reason.
I don't know what the radical feminists are doing about it, I don't hang out with them too much. But I can't imagine there is much they could say that would gain better treatment for the victims.
I am familiar with organizations such as Half the Sky Foundation which try to make things better through founding schools, etc.
Which reminds me, have you heard the latest stunt being pulled in Afghanistan; they're gassing girls' schools, not enough to kill them, just enough to make them sick, and scared to come back. Not sure which nihilist radical jihad group is claiming credit.
Hi Terry,
Highlighting and comparing Roman Catholicism's past treatment of gay people with present day fundamentalist Islam's is hardly "over the top"! Rather, it's reasonable and relevant as it demonstrates that religious traditions evolve and change. And isn't that what we're hoping to witness within aspects of Islam?
I'm not Muslim. I'm part of the Roman Catholic tradition. That's where I'm called to be and use my gifts and talents to further the evolution of thinking and action around LGBT issues. I have to trust that there are moderate and progressive Muslims working within their tradition, facilitating its evolution. Clearly in some parts of the Muslim world we see this happening. For instance, in Indonesia, moderate Muslims have elected a woman as president!
The Catholics I know applaud such developments. They do not support the terrible manifestations of fundamentalism within Islam. The post I shared critiques such fundamentalism.
Ultimately, that's what I feel called to challenge - fundamentalism, that fearful and intolerant mindset that dismisses, demonizes and marginalizes others. Such a dehumanizing way of thinking and acting is totally incompatible with the life and message of Jesus. I can and do speak out against such dehumanization, but it's within Catholicism that I'm situated and so that's my primary focus. As a Catholic gay man I'm very much aware that dehumanizing fundamentalist thinking is still very much alive within my church - especially around issues of sexuality.
The Vatican may no longer burn "sodomites" at the stake, but its uninformed, insensitive, and rigid thinking and teaching on homosexuality has the capacity to cause great harm to individuals, families and communities. It must, therefore, be lovingly critiqued and challenged.
Peace,
Michael
P.S. You and your readers may find this recent New York Times op-ed of interest.
Like LarryD said, they are guided by an anti-Catholic bias, plain and simple. And it's quite unbelievable that their dislike for the Church should supersede a cause(s) that is near and dear to them.
This whole thing is just horrific and evil...
reading about this woman (who was raped, by the way) and all she has been through is just unbelievable.
Jesus, mercy!
Robert, one commenter reminded me that homophobia is a cooked up word too.
Michael - me thinks ye protests too much.
Since the goal of Islam is conquest and conversion of the entire world by any means necessary, I would say "Islamisization" is a perfect word.
As to likening the charitable reasons why sin is sin and why we must not bless or enable it while we must love the sinner, to the fundamentals of Islam shows a propensity for listening to sound bytes.
Although some groups are not vocally supporting Islam, they are certainly not denouncing its policies toward women and gays in any arena in which they would be noticed or heard. I suspect this is because they want the Catholic church, and Christian ethic to fail after which they will worry about their rights under Islam. By that time it may be far too late.
I guess we will see if we live so long!
Says Terry: "Me thinks ye protests too much."
Oh, come on, Terry! Just as we're beginning to engage in meaningful dialogue you cop-out with that old chestnut. I'm disappointed.
Peace,
Michael
Michael - I'm not as smart as you - so it it is an unequal match. Maybe someone else will engage?
The Vatican may no longer burn "sodomites" at the stake, but its uninformed, insensitive, and rigid thinking and teaching on homosexuality has the capacity to cause great harm to individuals, families and communities.
I dunno - that sounds like rather fundamentalist thinking to me.
In France the tail is wagging the dog and everybody seems to be too cowardly to do anything about it (in the government).
My mom and I had a few conversations concerning this after she moved to Kansas and shockingly observed the Mennonite and Amish women and how "opppressed" they were...and a working gal growing up in the 50's and very active in politics--she was a card-carrying Democrat-- she worked very hard for women's equality and opportunity in the workplace--especially when it came to pay and promotion opportunities..we forget that back then men often got paid 2-3 times as much as a woman for doing the EXACT same job, even if it was office work, and men coming back from the war often took jobs away from women as "they needed a job." And this was before welfare and all the other social support programs we have now...women like men who get to work engineering jobs and get paid the same as a man have her and the hard word of the rest of her sisters to thanks.
Anyway--she remarked on how "backward" she thought the Amish women were. I thought about it a bit, and my comment back was "It all depends on if they WANT to live that way, or if they are FORCED to live that way. Another wasy of looking at it is if they know no different."
If some women truely want to live this extreme Muslim lifestyle as it is fulfilling and pleasing to them, God Bless them. But if it forced upon them by brutal arrogant menfolk, with archaic punishments such as lashings and "honor killings" for the smallest infraction, and keepingthme ignorant and undeucated so that they don't know any better, then it becomes a human rights issue and agencies need to step to protect them.
The burqa or abaya is not the problem...it is the understanding as to why they are wearing it.
Sara
Sara: Amen.
Our neighbors at our Oratory are Mennonites; we stopped by to see their new Boarder Collie puppies recently...we in our monastic habits; they in their particular "wardrobe"...the children and dad wave at us now when they go by on their bicycles or in their carriage; they were so very polite and hospitable to us...they were anxious to hear when we were going to finally move in (alas, God Alone knows this mystery!!)...we hear the clicking of horses' hooves from the Amish buggies on Sunday morning during Adoration;
I feel more "at home" with them than with many Catholics...
you are correct: if this is what you choose, from your heart, it is authentic.
Period.
Robert Zacher:
You are so naive. The Muslims are like the Catholic Church. They take the long view. They have been engaged in converting the world since the 7th century. They realize they can't do it with armies now. But they can do it with oil.
Saul Alinsky's style of revolution is similar, but works much faster.
Shariah law is now legal in Birmingham and other large cities in England.
When Shirah law starts coming after homosexuals, who are you going to go to for help.
Michael Bayly:
Michael ceased to be a practicing Catholic long ago. He just says he is because nobody would pay attention to him if they didn't think he was Catholic.
Like so many today, he can be found occasionally in a Catholic church today because he loves the art, the architecture, the music, the entertainment and affirming messages that approve of his choice of lifestyle.
He claims he has no choice; but he denies choice to homosexuals who prefer Courage, while demanding choice for women who prefer to kill their babies.
Animals have no choice; they go by instinct.
Human beings, a physical product of evolution, were given a mind and a soul created by and in the Image and Likeness of Almighty God who gave us Free Will. Free Will to choose to love Him, or to reject Him.
Hello Ray: You pasted
... Shariah law is now legal in Birmingham and other large cities in England.
When Shirah law starts coming after homosexuals, who are you going to go to for help(?) ..
The majority of cases heard in the courts involve divorce or financial disputes. Sharia's great strength is that those appear before religious courts avoid re-offending so as not to bring shame on their families. It seems that first sharia court in the UK started in Birmingham in 1982, and others have followed in London and some other cities.
Although their rulings are not recognised by English law, participants often agree to abide by the court's decision in the same way that Jewish civil disputes are often settled in their own court, the Beth Din. In other words, adversaries in the religious courts mutually agree to enter into a type of binding mediation and settlement.
Divorces, for instance, and other acts of a public law nature or in equity must still be ratified by English civil law courts.
In reality the operation of sharia courts in England and elsewhere in the west are not at all what you and others say or imply. Citizens of western nations are nowhere
and in any way legally compelled to be subject to the jurisdiction of Moslem or Jewish religious courts.
Post a Comment