Sunday, June 8, 2008 | Reason : Religion as Child Abuse | print version

Couple charged in Norway over genital mutilation of daughters

by The Globe And Mail

Thanks to Linda Ward Selbie for the link.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080606.wnorway0606/BNStory/International/home

Couple charged in Norway over genital mutilation of daughters

OSLO — Police in Norway said Friday they have filed preliminary charges against a husband and wife for the alleged genital mutilation of five of their daughters.

It was the first such case opened under Norwegian laws against female circumcision.

The couple were both originally from Gambia, but are now Norwegian citizens, said a statement from Human Rights Services, an activist group that alerted police to the case. The daughters, ranging in age from 5 to 14 years, were all born in Norway.

"This is the first time we have raised such a charge by the Oslo police, and as far as I know it is the first ever in Norway," Hanna Kristin Rhode, of the Oslo police, told the state radio network NRK.

The 41-year-old father has two other wives in Gambia, and four of the daughters are now living with those women, police said.

"The mother and father are charged under the law against genital mutilation because they contributed to five of their six daughters being mutilated," Ms. Rhode said. None of the names were released.

Norway banned female circumcision with a 1996 law that sets a prison term of three years for anyone contributing to genital mutilation, and up to eight years if the mutilation results in death or severe health damage. In 2004, an amendment required school and health personnel to alert authorities to possible cases or face fines or up to one year in prison.

Female genital mutilation involves the removal of a girl's clitoris or other genital parts, usually shortly after birth or at a young age, which can cause lasting pain and complications in childbirth. While it is practiced in many parts of the world, it is most common in Africa.

Police were seeking a court order to hold the father during the investigation and pending a possible formal indictment. Police were not seeking to hold the mother because she is seven months pregnant. The couple also has a 3-year-old daughter, who had not been mutilated and is now in public child care.

Ms. Rhode said police want the four daughters in Gambia to return to Norway, because they are citizens and have been in daycare and school in the Nordic country.

Add to del.icio.us Posted: Sunday, June 8, 2008 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 50 of 85 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #190028 by Dinah on June 8, 2008 at 8:46 am

FGM has been illegal in the UK for some years, but there have never been any prosecutions here. This does not mean it is not taking place.

Unbelievably, when the vogue of multi-culturalism was at its height, some so-called liberals even defended the practice, arguing that it was a matter of culture, and we in the west were being 'cultural imperialists' or some such rubbish, in condemning it.

Other Comments by Dinah

2. Comment #190029 by AlexAtheist on June 8, 2008 at 8:50 am

What do you expect, Norway, when you have an immigration policy of allowing people with a twelfth century mindset concerning the treatment of women to be welcomed into your country? Islam is not compatible with a modern liberal Western democracy. Take off the politically correct lenses and see things for how they really are.

Other Comments by AlexAtheist

3. Comment #190033 by PopeStig on June 8, 2008 at 8:56 am

The 2004 amendement to the law also includes people working for a religious organisations in addition to health and school personnel. Priests and imans that allow this practice to go on in their congregation would face up to one year in prison.

Other Comments by PopeStig

4. Comment #190035 by conan1989 on June 8, 2008 at 8:58 am

make the punishment fit the crime. he fuck with their lady bits, so fuck up his bits

Other Comments by conan1989

5. Comment #190036 by mordacious1 on June 8, 2008 at 9:03 am

Is it the imans who do the mutilation? Whoever performs such things, should be fined, jailed, then deported. These guys have a plush life in the west, they won't want to go back to Somalia, or the Sudan.

Other Comments by mordacious1

6. Comment #190039 by PopeStig on June 8, 2008 at 9:15 am

Mordacious,

In the Norwegian newpaper Aftenposten's coverage of this case there's a sidebar that specifies that most of the operations are carried out by women, and also that the actual mutilation probably happened in Gambia and not in Norway. IANAL but I believe the family's Iman in Norway (if they are muslim) could be charged if he knew about this and did nothing to prevent it.

The same article points out that the mutilations are not illegal in Gambia and that Gambia's president has stated that he has no intention of outlawing them.

Other Comments by PopeStig

7. Comment #190045 by Vanitas on June 8, 2008 at 9:24 am

I'm sorry, but where in the article does it say this family is muslim? Am I missing something here?

Other Comments by Vanitas

8. Comment #190046 by PopeStig on June 8, 2008 at 9:24 am

Alex @ 4,

If they had not moved to Norway and had stayed in Gambia, the mutilations would have happened anyway and their 3 year old would probably also have gone under the knife without the parents being charged at all.

I am not sufficiently familiar with Norway's immigration policy to discuss it confidently, but I don't see how this case relates to it in any other way than enabling the Norwegian police to prosecute the family.

Other Comments by PopeStig

9. Comment #190047 by SPS on June 8, 2008 at 9:26 am

Another disturbing result of superstition:
Albinos, Long Shunned, Face Threat in Tanzania

Other Comments by SPS

10. Comment #190050 by HitbLade on June 8, 2008 at 9:28 am

Why can't we descriminate agianst religions? That would be soooo wonderful.

Other Comments by HitbLade

11. Comment #190051 by Barry Pearson on June 8, 2008 at 9:29 am

Dinah said: FGM has been illegal in the UK for some years

And it remains illegal even if the woman consents to it. This is a sensible recognition of the social pressures that women in such communities can sucumb to.

(If only these pressures were acknowledged in other cases, such as postal voting where women easily become disenfranchised).

Dinah said: Unbelievably, when the vogue of multi-culturalism was at its height, some so-called liberals even defended the practice, arguing that it was a matter of culture, and we in the west were being 'cultural imperialists' or some such rubbish, in condemning it.

I remember that. (Ditto for forced marriages, etc). This is a mind-boggling lack of empathy towards such women.

In order to argue like that, those "liberals" must either place "community rights" above "human rights", or else treat those particular women as somehow "less than human" and so not having full human rights.

Other Comments by Barry Pearson

12. Comment #190053 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 8, 2008 at 9:30 am

Proof, if proof were ever neaded that Muslim intigration is a fool's hope.

Surely the feminists will be up in arms about this, demanding strict measures taken to ensure the dignity and equality of Muslim women?

*crickets chirping*

Yeah, I though so. No, not for them, when speaking out involves some measure of risk and controversy.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

13. Comment #190057 by Vanitas on June 8, 2008 at 9:38 am

Again, I don't understand why it is being assumed by so many people here that the couple is muslim. I don't see where in the article it says that.

Don't count on me ever to say anything in defence of islam. But the fact is that FGM is, as far as I know, a practice native to Africa and common with people of all religions. This couple could be christian, for all I know.

I might be wrong. But I just don't see the connection with Islam, for all its horridities, and FGM.

Other Comments by Vanitas

14. Comment #190059 by Dax on June 8, 2008 at 9:53 am

@Vanitas:
True, however, chances are big that they are not Christian. FGM mostly takes place in Islamic and animalistic african cultures. According to the CIA world factbook the religious makeup of Gambia is:
Muslim 90%, Christian 9%, indigenous beliefs 1%

So, chances are rather big they're Muslim.

Other Comments by Dax

15. Comment #190060 by Darwin's badger on June 8, 2008 at 9:56 am

You are correct, Vanitas. Reaching conclusions without evidence does this site a disservice, methinks.

Other Comments by Darwin's badger

16. Comment #190061 by Vanitas on June 8, 2008 at 9:58 am

Dax:

Thanks. That's the info I was missing.
I was just going off the fact that FGM is older in Africa than Islam, and has as much to do with Islam as it does with the other monotheisms.

Other Comments by Vanitas

17. Comment #190064 by mordacious1 on June 8, 2008 at 10:04 am

Vanitas

I understand your point. My question is, why did the article not specify the religion? I think they may (I know, big assumption on my part) be afraid of criticizing a certain religion (and we all know what that religion is). Whenever someone leaves out an important fact like what the religion is, it makes me suspicious.

Other Comments by mordacious1

18. Comment #190065 by Vanitas on June 8, 2008 at 10:08 am

mordacious1

Ah, I agree with you there. Surely their beliefs must play some part in explaining their practice?

Other Comments by Vanitas

19. Comment #190068 by ThoughtsonCommonToad on June 8, 2008 at 10:11 am

Surely their beliefs must play some part in explaining their practice?

Surely that is the most significant part. The most important part, perhaps even the only part.

Other Comments by ThoughtsonCommonToad

20. Comment #190072 by epeeist on June 8, 2008 at 10:19 am

Comment #190059 by Dax

True, however, chances are big that they are not Christian. FGM mostly takes place in Islamic and animalistic african cultures. According to the CIA world factbook the religious makeup of Gambia is:
Muslim 90%, Christian 9%, indigenous beliefs 1%

Note that the man had two other wives, so almost certainly not Christian.

Not sure what the position is of animistic religions is to polygamy.

Other Comments by epeeist

21. Comment #190073 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 8, 2008 at 10:22 am

Not sure what the position is of animistic religions is to polygamy.

Not a problem with many of them, but come on - does anyone doubt that this is yet another Mohammedan atrocity? Especially since the immigrant population in Norway is principally Muslim.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

22. Comment #190079 by Vanitas on June 8, 2008 at 10:46 am

Fanusi Khiyal
does anyone doubt that this is yet another Mohammedan atrocity?

But that is exactly what I am doubting.

I was born and raised in Algeria, a predominantly muslim African country. I was circumcised at the age of 6 (male), but female "circumcision" was virtually unheard of.

But I know very little about the topic, and I guess there may be some sense in which FGM is a practice exclusive to muslims of certain African cultures (e.g. Algeria is mostly an Arab and Berber country, and besides, in most senses their lifestyle could be considered "civilised")

Other Comments by Vanitas

23. Comment #190081 by RamziD on June 8, 2008 at 10:48 am

I do not defend any religion. Any.

However, I really think some of the people on this site use their atheist stance to hide what is truly racist beliefs, especially against islam. For instance, when people say things like "Islam is not compatible with a modern liberal Western democracy" or "Proof, if proof were ever neaded that Muslim intigration is a fool's hope." I don't see any problem attacking the religion or the religious practices, but that's different than making blanket statements about a whole group of people.

Islam can be compatible with western society. Currently, the way it is being practiced by a majority of the people in the world, it isn't. But if and when people choose to ignore the literal scripture (a BIG if and when, i'm aware), like the way people do with the old and new testament, then islam will be able to become westernized like christianity and judaism have.

I honestly believe that if we were to round up muslims into internment camps like were done to the japanese or launch nuclear bombs on the middle east, there would be quite a few people on this site who would not see any problem with that.

Other Comments by RamziD

24. Comment #190082 by Dinah on June 8, 2008 at 10:52 am

While it is true that FGM is not specifically a Muslim practice, it is condoned in many Muslim countries where it is used as a particularly vicious and barbarous way to control women, deny them sexual pleasure, and ensure they are virgins when they are married. When I see Muslims protesting against FGM rather than 'offensive' cartoons or books, I may start to think that Islam is moving out of its medieval mindset, but I suspect I'll be waiting for a long time.

Other Comments by Dinah

25. Comment #190083 by King of NH on June 8, 2008 at 10:54 am

"Note that the man had two other wives, so almost certainly not Christian."

But we should remember that Fundamentalist Mormons (to be fair, not the mainstream Mormons) still practice polygamy, as do many Christian cults.

As far as assuming they are Muslim, when the article says nothing, is perhaps statistically supportable, but is unfair. I do not support Muslims any more than Christians, but I will not unfairly attack them without sufficient evidence. It should be easy to dig a little deeper into the story to discover this for fact, and we should not be speculating.

Other Comments by King of NH

26. Comment #190085 by Dinah on June 8, 2008 at 10:58 am

I cannot see that as Muslims are not a race, any more than Christians are, that making negative comments about them can be described as 'racist'. Such comments may be uncalled for, unfair, even illegal, but hardly 'racist'.

Other Comments by Dinah

27. Comment #190087 by RamziD on June 8, 2008 at 11:01 am

Okay, thanks for the nit-picking of my comments, Dinah. Racist is not the correct term. I don't think it would prevent anyone from seeing my point, though.

Other Comments by RamziD

28. Comment #190093 by Corylus on June 8, 2008 at 11:13 am

Ayaan Hirsi Ali on the link between FGM and animistic religions:

The sewing together of the vaginal walls is not, strictly speaking, an Islamic custom. The Prophet Muhammad says in the Koran that boys should be circumcised, but no mention is made of female circumcision. The tradition of stitching is pre-Islamic but was adopted by Islam; you could compare it to what happened with the pre-Christian tradition of the Christmas tree in Christianity. Muslim scholars have never condemned the practice of female circumcision because in Islam the importance of virginity at marriage counts so heavily. When they came into contact with this tribal ritual they must have thought, Hey, wouldn't that be a good way to guarentee a woman's virginity? Excellent! Stitching is especially popular in African Islamic countries, such as Somalia, Eritrea, Sudan and Eygpt, and also in Indonesia.
The Caged Virgin

Of course, it is impossible to say from article whether the 'parents' concerned are Muslim or continuing a strictly tribal custom.

Either way, it's a disgusting practice that I am glad to see a prosecution is being planned.

Other Comments by Corylus

29. Comment #190095 by emmet on June 8, 2008 at 11:23 am

Islam can be compatible with western society. Currently, the way it is being practiced by a majority of the people in the world, it isn't. But if and when people choose to ignore the literal scripture (a BIG if and when, i'm aware), like the way people do with the old and new testament, then islam will be able to become westernized like christianity and judaism have.

In other words, we shouldn't criticise Islam because if it was completely different, it would be OK.

Can't argue with that logic.

Other Comments by emmet

30. Comment #190098 by Fanusi Khiyal on June 8, 2008 at 11:26 am

I have long gotten used to the fact that amongst any gathering of 'freethinkers' there will always be those who like the moniker as a fashion accessory, but who balk when confronting the true horrors that faith has to offer. Case in point:

However, I really think some of the people on this site use their atheist stance to hide what is truly racist beliefs, especially against islam.

What race is Islam again?

Oh, I notice that someone has already called him on this:

.Racist is not the correct term. I don't think it would prevent anyone from seeing my point, though.

Which was what? That those of us who support women's rights, freedom of conscience, freedom of speech, and oppose paedophilia and sundry practices, and recognise that this means opposing Islam, are just bigots? Well, if that's the case, why do none of us worry about, say, Hindu or Sikh immigration? Or Christian Arab immigration?

But if and when people choose to ignore the literal scripture (a BIG if and when, i'm aware), like the way people do with the old and new testament, then islam will be able to become westernized like christianity and judaism have.

If, if, if. Almost all Muslims see the Qur'an as the uncreated word of God. To question that would be to destroy Islam. And on this slender thread of hope you'd gamble the future of civilisation?

In the real world, Islam is incompatible with democracy. Large-scale Muslim immigration is incompatible with continued civil society.

And I was under the impression that the point of Richard Dawkins writings was that religion needs to be eradicated, not just 'moderated'?

Or is it simply that taking on real religious fervour is too much - too difficult, too controversial, too dangerous?

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

31. Comment #190100 by PopeStig on June 8, 2008 at 11:29 am

Fanusi @ 21

Immigrant population in Norway per ssi.no is 460,000 amd the official number of muslims is just shy of 80,000 again according to ssi.no. Hardly 'principally muslim'.

Of course, if you have facts that say otherwise, I am of course open to be corrected.

Other Comments by PopeStig

32. Comment #190105 by AlexAtheist on June 8, 2008 at 11:38 am

PopeStig,
Yes it is true that had the family stayed in Gambia the girls would have been mutilated but the problem is that barbarians bring this sort of practice to a Western country and then demand that it be respected out of misguided multiculturalism. Ghettoisation follws and then we end up with "no go zones" within our own countries.

RamziD,
Why is it so easy for so many people to confuse cultural criicism with racism? Since when did Islam become a race?

Other Comments by AlexAtheist

33. Comment #190108 by mspadorchard on June 8, 2008 at 11:42 am

"Islam is not compatible with a modern liberal Western democracy"

When most of Islam wishes it to be, perhaps that will be... but until a newspaper in Denmark can publish a Mo caracature, Islam in many countries does not demonstrate itself to be compatable with a modern Western democracy.

Death to any infidel, or for that matter one who leaves the faith, is not compatable with any democracy... and freedom of religion must by definition also mean freedom from religion.

M.

Other Comments by mspadorchard

34. Comment #190109 by Barry Pearson on June 8, 2008 at 11:46 am

RamziD said: For instance, when people say things like "Islam is not compatible with a modern liberal Western democracy" .... Islam can be compatible with western society. Currently, the way it is being practiced by a majority of the people in the world, it isn't. But if and when people choose to ignore the literal scripture (a BIG if and when, i'm aware), like the way people do with the old and new testament, then islam will be able to become westernized like christianity and judaism have.

I think you started to get closer towards the end.

Islam in full is not compatible with a modern liberal Western democracy. For example, Islam is technically incompatible with Universal Human Rights. (See later).

Individual Muslims can be more enlightened than Islam itself, if their community allows them to be. Just as Christians can be more enlightened than Christianity, if allowed to be. Unfortunately, many Islamic communities, even whole Islamic states, don't make it easy. Islamic reform groups exist - it would be wrong to say that all Muslims favour traditional or fundamentalist Islam. But such groups have to be very careful, and sometimes get death threats. For example, here is a website that identifies the "bad bits" of the Koran, such as "beat your wife" (4:34) and "slay the pagans" (9:5), and publishes a Koran with just the "good bits":
http://reformislam.org/
http://reformislam.org/verses.php

Islam doesn't have an agreed authority to say what degree of enlightenment is permitted while still being a Muslim. (It doesn't have the equivalent of the Papacy). There is no way of globally and/or permanently resolving arguments about whether Islam is a religion of peace, or resolving whether it is just a religion or also a political manifesto:
http://www.barrypearson.co.uk/articles/gods/islam.htm#natureofislam

When the UN published its Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Saudi Arabia didn't sign it. I don't know if they have done so yet. Some Muslims have regretted than ANY Islamic states signed it. In 2000, the Organization of the Islamic Conference officially resolved to support the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, the 2nd attempt to define a watered-down version of human rights:
"Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam":
http://www.barrypearson.co.uk/articles/gods/islam_cairo.htm

Other Comments by Barry Pearson

35. Comment #190111 by BicycleRepairMan on June 8, 2008 at 11:58 am

What do you expect, Norway, when you have an immigration policy of allowing people with a twelfth century mindset concerning the treatment of women to be welcomed into your country? Islam is not compatible with a modern liberal Western democracy. Take off the politically correct lenses and see things for how they really are.

What a remarkably ignorant post, dont you realise that when these things happen in Gambia, nobody will raise as much as an eyebrow? In this case, atleast there will be a trial and hopefully a strict sentencing .

Should we prevent immigration to prevent these people from being caught?

Hopefully they'll get a severe punishment, and lose custody of their children, like non-religious psychos always do when they abuse their children. If nothing else, it could serve as a warning to other parents who comes to Norway.

Other Comments by BicycleRepairMan

36. Comment #190112 by Diacanu on June 8, 2008 at 12:01 pm

Ugh, we gotta sift apart some concepts that clearly melt together too easily in some people's minds.

First of all, as has been stated, Islam is not a race.

Second, Islam, like all religions, gives a false picture of the nature of the universe, and life.

Therefore, it is a faulty wordview.

One could easily say, an inferior one.

Barbaric culture that springs forth from such a worldview is itself inferior.
Inferior at bringing happiness, safety, and prosperity to its people.

And such barbarity is inseperable from the religion that sprung it.

Therefore, Islam, at least in its undiluted fundamentalist form, is an inferior culture.

Does that mean the people within it are inferior?
No, they're the sad dupes of a delusion.

But, even within that delusion, grown people are free moral agents and those who have practiced barbarity have made their moral choices, and will face my judgement.

And coming back around, a culture that produces such a disproportionate amount of such people, is inferior.

It's loaded language given history, but anything else is imprecise and/or dishonest.

It'd be bigotry if I said muslims as individuals were inferior, and then on top of that I attached prescriptive behavior to such a judgement.

Generic bigotry, mind you, not racism.

I mean, let's at first get our language clear here.

The discourse can only be as good as the framing of our ideas.

Other Comments by Diacanu

37. Comment #190113 by epeeist on June 8, 2008 at 12:03 pm

Comment #190109 by Barry Pearson

Islam in full is not compatible with a modern liberal Western democracy. For example, Islam is technically incompatible with Universal Human Rights. (See later).

In addition the European Court of Human Rights has ruled that the introduction of Sharia and a theocratic regime were incompatible with the requirements of a democratic society.

http://www.echr.coe.int/Eng/Press/2003/feb/RefahPartisiGCjudgmenteng.htm

Other Comments by epeeist

38. Comment #190116 by PopeStig on June 8, 2008 at 12:06 pm

Alex @ 32,

I haven't found any demands linked to this case that asks for mutilation to be accepted. According to the articles I have read the father refuses any knowledge of the mutilations and the mother (also charged) has yet to be questioned. Not exactly a 'respect our culture' scenario.

I am pleased that Norway, a country that is guilty of its fair share of 'multicuturalism' is finally dealing with this. Fingers crossed they will be able to get a convictions, retrieve the 4 children from Gambia and place them with a foster family that is a bit more enlightened.

Other Comments by PopeStig

39. Comment #190120 by pinkvoils on June 8, 2008 at 12:11 pm

This is an abomination!I'm both dismaid and disgusted!!!

Other Comments by pinkvoils

40. Comment #190122 by mordacious1 on June 8, 2008 at 12:16 pm

pinkvoils

"dismaid"....pun or typo?

Other Comments by mordacious1

41. Comment #190129 by Border Collie on June 8, 2008 at 12:28 pm

Doesn't matter what religion it is or isn't. It's still pathological behavior. Probably Abrahamic, however, probably Muslim. Why PC pretend otherwise? Destroying or partially destroying a girls sexual identity is a good start on destroying her whole identity. Maybe someday the fear of female genitalia and females in general by primitives will cease. Hey, I know it's the whole snake in the garden with Eve issue (and probably some other archaic stuff). So what? It's just symbolism. It isn't real/literal. Let's outgrow it. Damn, leave the girls alone! I'd bet that if a few million penises were removed in certain parts of the world and eye or two would begin to open.

Other Comments by Border Collie

42. Comment #190130 by Colwyn Abernathy on June 8, 2008 at 12:30 pm

Damn, leave the girls alone! I'd bet that if a few million penises were removed in certain parts of the world and eye or two would begin to open

I'd like my foreskin back, plz. Mebbe for a little while, see what it's SUPPOSED to feel like. Medical benefits my ass.

Other Comments by Colwyn Abernathy

43. Comment #190140 by Barry Pearson on June 8, 2008 at 12:46 pm

epeeist said: In addition the European Court of Human Rights has ruled that the introduction of Sharia and a theocratic regime were incompatible with the requirements of a democratic society.

Thanks for that, it was new to me. (I've added it to some of my pages).

My simplistic view of the Council of Europe is that it was set up soon after World War 2 to prevent a breakdown in human rights and democracy in Europe leading to World War 3. I'm sure you know, but I know many people don't, that all member states of the European Union (a separate body) are members of the Council of Europe.

I like the sentence:

The Court considered that a political party might campaign for a change in the law or the legal and constitutional structures of the State on two conditions: firstly, the means used to that end must be legal and democratic in every respect; secondly, the change proposed must itself be compatible with fundamental democratic principles.

I suspect that will be useful in future as the Muslim population increases in Europe. In effect, you can't campaign to abolish democracy even via democratic means!

Other Comments by Barry Pearson

44. Comment #190167 by ukvillafan on June 8, 2008 at 1:26 pm

Re: Popestig @ 31

Assuming those statistics are accurate 80,000 is 17% of 460,000, nearly one fifth, so there is a reasonable chance of the term "principally" muslim being accurate if, a) muslims account for the biggest religious grouping of immigrants and b) we define the term "principally" broadly as meaning "the largest grouping". Without additional statistical information, I am, of course, merely speculating.

The point about FGM is that it is a means used to control women and the root cause of such control is the dominance of men, aided and abetted by the older females in a community (who benefit vicariously from the maintenance of the societal structure, or are perceived to.) It doesn't matter to a large degree how it originated as a practice; the point is that religions in general and such mechanisms of control are comfortable bedfellows. Religion will adopt a method that promotes the ability of the few to control the many, because that is how religion survives.

And I too was around when FGM was not necessarily considered to be child abuse by a certain type of social work professional here in the UK. Hardly believable but true.

Other Comments by ukvillafan

45. Comment #190236 by robotaholic on June 8, 2008 at 3:24 pm

the fact that they actually cut off the genitals of babies needs to be highlighted - I constantly hear about this and it's not as insane sounding as it used to be/should be - we should stop this in every country - I can't believe that without religion any barbaric practice as this would have ever gotten started -

Man I despise, detest, hate, oppose, am revulsed, am malevolent towards, loathe, dislike, and can't stand religion.

Other Comments by robotaholic

46. Comment #190237 by RamziD on June 8, 2008 at 3:25 pm

Again, if it makes you feel better to criticize my incorrect use of a term, please do. I do not want to get in the way of your self-aggrandizement.

The point was, some of you like to make blanket statements about a whole group of people, which is rather unfair. Like I said before, I do not stick up for any religion or the archaic beliefs they nourish, but I try not to turn my hatred towards everyone who practices the religion. You correctly attack the oppression of women, cruelty, hypocrisy that we see in religion. I agree with you on that.

But listen to what some of you are implying. From your comments, I basically heard that the solution would be to ban muslim immigration into western societies. This is because islam can never be compatible with the west. Sorry, but I do not agree with you on this.

Can islam ever be compatible with the west? Reading the old testament, you would never think judaism would be compatible with the west. Like in our never-ending quest to understand the universe, just because we can't think of the solution to the problem, it doesn't mean we will never be able to.

Do I think that islam will be on par with christianity or judaism in the relatively diluted way they are practiced today? I never implied that it would be soon or in our lifetime. I was very careful not to imply that. Like all of you, I would like to see religion totally eradicated from this planet. It's not going to happen in one step, though. We need to get used to this reality.

To get back to my original criticism, I do see some xenophobic undertones in the statments some people make on this site. It makes me think what else is behind it. That is all.

Other Comments by RamziD

47. Comment #190283 by Ned Flanders on June 8, 2008 at 5:36 pm

"To get back to my original criticism, I do see some xenophobic undertones in the statments some people make on this site. It makes me think what else is behind it. That is all. "

Islam is NOT a race!

Other Comments by Ned Flanders

48. Comment #190285 by Goldy on June 8, 2008 at 5:43 pm

Islam is NOT a race!

I think this has been beaten to death now. No, it is not a race, but what is your mental image of a Muslim? I dare say it is nothing like the face you see in the mirror every morning...

Other Comments by Goldy

49. Comment #190287 by RamziD on June 8, 2008 at 5:55 pm

xen-o-pho-bi-a

an unreasonable fear or hatred of foreigners or strangers or of that which is foreign or strange.

Maybe you'd like to clarify your point, Ned

Other Comments by RamziD

50. Comment #190295 by melsdr on June 8, 2008 at 6:26 pm

Just to let you guys know that I live in Malaysia, and female circumcision is common amongst the muslim majority, although it seems that over here, only the labia get removed, and not the clit. Statements that FGM is only an african issue are exaggerated.

Other Comments by melsdr