I just don't understand religion

[Cranky]

I am not going t0o disagree with BC that churches do a lot of good in many communities. The problem is and has always been people who have used peoples faith for profit and/or power. A priest or a cleric preaching is nothing more then one mans opinion cloaked as an interpretation for the word of God (s).

My father was responsible for controlling the money of a small church. From cash collection to deposit to signing checks. I was surprised to see him in this role because he is not an accountant but I guess honesty and integrity overrode everything. One of the woman in the church kept the books and when I was there, I went through them. Interestingly enough, there was absolutely NO surprises as far as expenditures where concerned and the priests did indeed live modestly.

That church wanted to build an old peoples home. Unlike here, if you are poor there, you are POOR and not the Canadian left wing definition of "poor". I was so impressed with their integrity and community work that if the Chinese junk invasion hadn't devastate my customers base......

Anywho....

My point is that yes, religion can serve as a conduit for incredible community work as well as spiritual guidance. BUT, like everything else, it depends on the people involved. Secondly, you don't have to be religious to do that kind of work, again, it depends o the people involved.

As an atheist, I wouldn't shed a tear if all religions disappeared, on the other hand, if that is what people want to believe and it gives them comfort, GOOD morals and direction, then by all means.

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

habsaddict said:

I am not going t0o disagree with BC that churces do a lot of good in many communities. The problem ais and has always been people who have used peoples faith for profit and/or power. A priest or a cleric preaching is nothing more then one mans opinion cloaked as an interpertation for the word of God (s).

My father was responsible for controlling the money of a small church. From cash collection to deposit to signing checks. I was suprised to see him in this role because he is not an accountant but I guess honesty and integrity overrode everything. One of the woman in the church kept the books and when I was there, I went through them. Interestingly enough, there was absolutely NO suprises as far as expenditures where concerned and the priests did indeed live modestly.

That church wanted to build an old peoples home. Unlike here, if you are poor there, you are POOR and not the Canadian left wing definition of "poor". I was so impressed with their integrity and community work that if the Chinese junk invasion hadn't devastate my customers base......

Anywho....

My point is that yes, religion can serve as a conduit for incredible community work as well as spiritual guidance. BUT, like everything else, it depends on the people involved. Secondly, you don't have to be religious to do that kind of work, again, it depends o the people involved.

As an atheist, I wouldn't shed a tear if all religions disappeared, on the other hand, if that is what people want to believe and it gives them comfort, GOOD morals and direction, then by all means.

Excellent post. My sentiments too.

[Skilly]

badcompany said:

It's easy to take potshots at the religious, even fashionable, but it's rarely warranted in my opinion. And often it veers off into "well what about this case" kinds of arguments, like Skilly's position that the Vatican has too much money, and therefor all religions are bad, be they Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, whatever.

Whoa whoa whoa .... where did I say ALL religions are bad.

First, when you see data with regards to wealthy countries it is always per capita.

The title of the thread is "I don't understand religion" , not I don't understand Islam ... therefore the RC (and any other church is open to discussion).

Sure the church does good ... lots of good. The Salvation Army (who I have nothing but good words for in regards to their chairty work) are always the first to helpout families when disaters hit.

But when the church screws up .... well they screw up big time. Not the taking the odd snort from the wine bottle kind of screw up, or the skim a few dollars from the collection plate screw up either ... it is the hurt you where you can not find your self-esteem anymore type pain that one never recovers from.

As to Bill Gates ....

Mr. (Warren) Buffett plans to give away 85 percent of his fortune, or about $37.4 billion, all in Berkshire stock. Of that amount, he will channel the greatest share, about $31 billion, into the Gates Foundation. The Gates Foundation, dedicated to improving health and education, especially in poor nations, is already the United States' largest grant-making foundation, with current assets of almost $30 billion. Mr. Buffett's huge contribution may permanently solidify that philanthropy's standing as the biggest and most influential organization of its kind. Mr. Buffett will join Mr. and Mrs. Gates as a trustee of their foundation.



So Bill Gates' foundation he founded to give to less fortunate has 67.4 billion. If your estimates of the RC Church are correct (I chose that one because I was under the understanding it was the richest church in the world) than they have 1/5 in reserves of what the Gates Foundation has. I believe he donates about 3 billion a year (thats just a guess .... could be a whale of a lot more for all I know). Why did Buffett give his money to Gates and not either give it away himself or create his own foundation?

"Most people with this sum of money would try to create their own foundation in their own image; he's entrusting it to someone with whom he's had a good close relationship but who is 25 years his junior, who might be around to make sure it is used properly."

[BadCompany]

skilly said:

The title of the thread is "I don't understand religion" , not I don't understand Islam ... therefore the RC (and any other church is open to discussion).

You are exactly right, the title of this thread is "I don't understand religion." And yet the reasons why religion is "bad" as per this thread, is based on individual actions; a man killing his teenager, perhaps because she refused to wear a religious garment, and a church, a single church (albeit the biggest one) which may or may not give out more money than Bill Gates (and as an aside, in 2002 charitable donations to religious charities topped $84 billion in the US alone - so Bill has a ways to go yet).

As I said, that diverges from the point. Individual acts by people within or outside of religion are irrelevant. It's like saying that democracy is bad and should be scrapped because the Newfoundland referendum on joining Canada was rigged. The concept of democracy/religion is a good one, and the good that democracy/religion do far outweighs the bad. Like everything in life it's so much easier to point out the failures, than to praise the successes.

[clear observer]

I dunno...I've always felt that religion(s), although unintentionally in most cases, always seem to end-up "dividing" folks. And we all know what that spawns.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

badcompany said:

You are exactly right, the title of this thread is "I don't understand religion." And yet the reasons why religion is "bad" as per this thread, is based on individual actions; a man killing his teenager, perhaps because she refused to wear a religious garment ...

I get into a tunnel vision of sorts at various times in this thread then something will give me a different persepctive again. I think the refusal to wear the hijab might only be the tip of the iceberg in this case, or more specifically, what the news media finds as a convenient starting point. From what I've been reading the daughter was simply distancing herself from her family's religious practices. On the surface it looks as if she welcomed the freedoms her peers were enjoying and wanted to be part of that. And she paid for it with her life.

... and a church, a single church (albeit the biggest one) which may or may not give out more money than Bill Gates (and as an aside, in 2002 charitable donations to religious charities topped $84 billion in the US alone - so Bill has a ways to go yet).

Excellent research!

As I said, that diverges from the point. Individual acts by people within or outside of religion are irrelevant. It's like saying that democracy is bad and should be scrapped because the Newfoundland referendum on joining Canada was rigged. The concept of democracy/religion is a good one, and the good that democracy/religion do far outweighs the bad. Like everything in life it's so much easier to point out the failures, than to praise the successes.

Failures are much easier to prove than successes when arguing a position. Given this I think it's easier to convince people of the negatives.

In keeping with the original storyline, here's perhaps another side that none of us has really taken the time to consider. This is a cut and paste from an article on Canoe.ca:

(defence lawyer Joseph Ciraco)"You can probably guess as to how (the family) is reacting to the arrest," Ciraco said. "It's clearly a tragedy. They are torn. I mean, you got a sister that's gone, and a father and brother that's in jail.

"I don't think it's a surprise that they're distraught about the whole thing and trying to cope as best as they can," he said. The rest of the story.

And the debate has only begun in the Muslim communities.

Cheers.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

admin said:

I dunno...I've always felt that religion(s), although unintentionally in most cases, always seem to end-up "dividing" folks. And we all know what that spawns.

Religion has always divided people sometimes within their very own cultures. We see differring denominations in Christianity and different interpretations of the Koran in Islam. Depends on who is telling the story.

Another from Canoe.ca:

Honour - and horror - of the head scarf

By JOE WARMINGTON

The Toronto Sun

News of her death was not an hour old when the words "honour killing" were bandied about.

Thanks to freedom, and the fair justice that comes with that, it could be years before we know the exact reason why 16-year-old Asqa Parvez had her life savagely stolen.

But we do know her father, Muhammad Parvez, 57, has been charged with her strangulation murder and her brother Waqas, 26, is charged with obstruction of justice.

Her schoolmates talk of disagreements over not wanting to wear the traditional hijab and other cultural and religious clashes in her home.

Whatever the truth, this is no time to hide behind political correctness but instead have an honest, fair, reasonable and effective discussion on what is believed to have transpired to help ensure it doesnt ever happen again.

"In my mind this was an honour killing," Tarek Fatah, the founder of the Muslim Canadian Congress, says adamantly about what he calls a blight on Islam.

Honour murders, which is really a ruthless form of misogyny, are a problem in some Islamic countries where women have become victims for going against family or for succumbing to perceived Western decadence or defying the Koran.

But could this really happen in Canada? It has happened in Germany, which also has extensive immigration from Muslim countries.

"The Federal Crime Office (Germany's FBI) registered 48 honour homicides between 1996 and 2006 with a further 22 people surviving attempted honour killings. The youngest victim was a 14-year-old, married Muslim girl," writes Stephen Brown in a powerful feature story in the U.S.-based FrontPage Magazine called, Horror Under the Head Scarf.

"The reasons for honour killings are varied. They range from the female victim living too Western (re: independent) a lifestyle, to wanting a divorce, to having left the family home to escape domestic violence or an abusive forced marriage. One of the problems is some arrive in a new country but never live in it."

Make no mistake, says Fatah: "This has happened before" and will again.

"It is going to get worse before it gets better," he said. "There needs to be honest debate about it."

Fatah says these murders have been covered up. "Sometimes they involve a balcony and they say it's suicide and other times they just don't find the body."

Perhaps a federal inquiry will be needed here. However, several Muslims told me such an idea is way over the top.

One teen said while her parents would not appreciate her removing her hijab, it would never go beyond a minor disagreement. But Fatah said the "media should not just talk to ones wearing the head scarfs but ones who don't want to."

In denouncing domestic abuse in a joint release with The Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations and the Islamic Society of Toronto, Islamic Social Services Association president Shahina Siddiqui said "if religion and culture has played a part in this, it cannot be ignored."

Calls from teens come "often enough to concern me" and she wants to ensure there is never another Asqa case.

"Girls should not be left on their own to deal with this," she said. "They need a place to go for help."

Ontario Opposition leader Bob Runciman said he will speak with the premier about setting up sensitive help lines or even a "safe house" for protection if necessary.

Siddiqui favours this idea saying, "in some cases people are caught between two cultures. Sometimes I fear we were so busy building the mosques and Islamic schools we neglected the family and social services area."

While it is too late to change things to save Asqa Parvez, there are others who could benefit from such protection.

In her memory, ensuring that would be the honourable thing to do.

The link.

As the article says, it has happened before and will happen again. Some families become divided when new ideas and concepts are introduced. Some find freedom in it, while some feel new ideas are a violation.

Cheers.

[BadCompany]

disgruntled70shab said:

News of her death was not an hour old when the words "honour killing" were bandied about.

Thanks to freedom, and the fair justice that comes with that, it could be years before we know the exact reason why 16-year-old Asqa Parvez had her life savagely stolen.

But we do know her father, Muhammad Parvez, 57, has been charged with her strangulation murder and her brother Waqas, 26, is charged with obstruction of justice.

Honour killing, and crime of passion are two very different things here, and I think it's very irresponsible to start labelling one without knowing the full details. An honour killing implies that the father coldly planned and calculated her murder. A crime of passion implies that in a heated argument - and no parent has ever gone through life without having a heated argument with a teenager - the father lost it strangled her.

It's unfortunate, but the latter happens all the time; whether it's choice of friends, clothes, music, dropping out of school, messy bedrooms, whatever. Parents "lose it" on their kids all the time, usually over something that in hindsight seems really trivial. Some only think "I could just strangle that kid"... others go too far.

I am not trying to excuse the father. His act was reprehensible and he should spend the rest of his life in jail. But to start tarring Islam and all Muslims in Canada with the "they kill their kids if they don't wear scarves" label is a little too premature. Again, without knowing the full details it's entirely possible the father just had a bad day, and was pushed too far by an insolent teenager. Happens all the time, irregardless of religion.

There was a high-profile case in the town I live in where an 18 year old boy and a 17 year old boy were in a traffic accident on a residential street, which led to one of the cars crashing through a fence and killing a three-year old girl. Horrible accident. The initial reports said that the two were drag-racing on the side street, which led to all kinds of condemnations, government speeches, protests, even a march. "Kids these days" was the general consensus. However, it now looks like the two weren't dragging racing, and that the driver of the car that hit the girl only had a learner's permit, and he didn't really know how to drive a standard car. Should he have been driving with only a learners permit in a car he couldn't control? Of course not. But crashing a car you don't know how to drive is much different from drag-racing down a residential street, wouldn't you say? The end result is tragically the same, a young girl is dead, but the circumstances behind it all are very different, and the "kids these days" consensus suddenly seems very premature...

[Disgruntled70sHab]

badcompany said:

Honour killing, and crime of passion are two very different things here, and I think it's very irresponsible to start labelling one without knowing the full details. An honour killing implies that the father coldly planned and calculated her murder. A crime of passion implies that in a heated argument - and no parent has ever gone through life without having a heated argument with a teenager - the father lost it strangled her.

I am not trying to excuse the father. His act was reprehensible and he should spend the rest of his life in jail. But to start tarring Islam and all Muslims in Canada with the "they kill their kids if they don't wear scarves" label is a little too premature. Again, without knowing the full details it's entirely possible the father just had a bad day, and was pushed too far by an insolent teenager. Happens all the time, irregardless of religion.

I think you're right here, BC. I would also add, though, that I'd understand if our Canadian Muslim community starts becoming concerned as to how the rest of the country is preceiving this whole scenario. From the same article:

"In my mind this was an honour killing," Tarek Fatah, the founder of the Muslim Canadian Congress, says adamantly about what he calls a blight on Islam.

This statement here suggests an honour killing without premeditation. Like ... you see what I mean? The differring paradigms are surfacing already. If I were a Muslim-Canadian who wants to belong I'd be pretty worried right about now. How are my friends and neighbours going to preceive this?

There was a high-profile case in the town I live in where an 18 year old boy and a 17 year old boy were in a traffic accident on a residential street, which led to one of the cars crashing through a fence and killing a three-year old girl. Horrible accident. The initial reports said that the two were drag-racing on the side street, which led to all kinds of condemnations, government speeches, protests, even a march. "Kids these days" was the general consensus. However, it now looks like the two weren't dragging racing, and that the driver of the car that hit the girl only had a learner's permit, and he didn't really know how to drive a standard car. Should he have been driving with only a learners permit in a car he couldn't control? Of course not. But crashing a car you don't know how to drive is much different from drag-racing down a residential street, wouldn't you say? The end result is tragically the same, a young girl is dead, but the circumstances behind it all are very different, and the "kids these days" consensus suddenly seems very premature...

To me this sounds a lot like the hijab reference I made above. The drag racing issue seems to be only a starting point for the media. And behind all the ruckess it created was a reporter.

In both stories, sure the kids made mistakes, but they also ended up being the biggest losers IMHO. Kids make mistakes, all kids do ... but when is there enough punishment?

Quite the thread I dare say.

Cheers.

[Skilly]

badcompany said:

(and as an aside, in 2002 charitable donations to religious charities topped $84 billion in the US alone - so Bill has a ways to go yet).

That's "to" religious charities ... not "from" religious bodies.

I am sure Bill Gates (ok maybe not Bill Gates, but Warren Buffet possible) even donates "to" religious charities. The church is a "religious charity".

How much money do individual religions donate around the world?

[franko]

Trying to not say much here . . . guess I fail again.

The purpose of a religious group/charity -- like any non-charitable organization -- is to use the money raised for charitable purposes (isn't that circular!) -- not to build a bank account.

I can only speak of my denomination (HA has already *gasp* spoken positively about another group), which runs programs (for lack of a better term) world-wide, as do other groups I know of. It is actually an exhaustive list -- I was surprised by all "we" do.

OK, we do not provide condoms in Africa, but we have many AIDS prevention and support programs . . . including orphanages and other means of support for parentless children (and children of AIDS patients).

Are we in competition with other religious groups? No. Are we in competition with non-religious groups? No. All groups can be and are used in their own corners. Is it better with religious overtones? Without? Who knows . . . the work is being done, that's all.

Back to the thread, the more I think about it the more I think this isn't a religious matter, but a generational matter clothed in religion. Teen disobeys parent. Parent threatens teen with punishment. Teen continues to disobey parents. Parent chokes teen -- punishment over the top. [I'm not trying to make light of the situation; just sticking with what happened]

[CentreHice]

This incident sounds exactly as I had posted earlier: a tenet of a religion is interpreted (brainwashed) in a certain manner.

This has nothing to do with a parent "losing it" with a teenager. Did the 26-year-old brother "lose it" too when he obstructed police? No...he was defending what his father did. There were reports from friends that she was also afraid of her brother. Is it out of the realm of possibility that he did it, and that the father is taking the fall?

It's not all of Islam I'm blanketing here...nor should it be by the media. But it IS a form of interpreting its law...and it's focussed on the role and value, precisely lack thereof, of females.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

franko said:

Trying to not say much here . . . guess I fail again.

The purpose of a religious group/charity -- like any non-charitable organization -- is to use the money raised for charitable purposes (isn't that circular!) -- not to build a bank account.

I can only speak of my denomination (HA has already *gasp* spoken positively about another group), which runs programs (for lack of a better term) world-wide, as do other groups I know of. It is actually an exhaustive list -- I was surprised by all "we" do.

OK, we do not provide condoms in Africa, but we have many AIDS prevention and support programs . . . including orphanages and other means of support for parentless children (and children of AIDS patients).

Are we in competition with other religious groups? No. Are we in competition with non-religious groups? No. All groups can be and are used in their own corners. Is it better with religious overtones? Without? Who knows . . . the work is being done, that's all.

I mentioned earlier in the thread where some people do charity work or contribute to charities because they feel it will look positively on them.

However, there are organizations who prefer to remain anonymous. I was close to becoming an apprentice Freemason about 3 years ago. However, as I got closer to it, I stepped back from it. Will come back to that in a sec.

The Freemasons do a lot of charitable work that is often taken for granted by those around them. However, to them that's totally cool.

A story from one of the lodges here in Kingston as it was conveyed to me. The lodge caught wind of a kid (in another city) who was going to have problems finishing his final year of college because he simply didn't have the finances. It was also learned that he came from a poor household so he wouldn't be able to rely on that as well. This got back to the lodge and a plan of action was put in place. Three Freemasons from here in Kingston traveled to the college and arranged for a meeting with the Dean. The Dean agreed with what they wanted to do so he paged the young guy from class and left he and the three Masons alone in his office. When the kid came out of the office he had enough money to finish his final year. The Freemasons, who identified themselves as that to the kid, wanted nothing in return. They left and the kid never saw them again.

However, whether we know it or not, Freemasons are very public in their charity work. And they could care less if they receive recognition or not. The important thing is that the deed gets done. Credit is not part of the equation.

Conversely, the Knights of Columbus also do a lot of community/charitable work but they are more visual about it. In this context it's not so much a bad thing. They simply want to promote their faith and values to the community.

As for the Freemasons, I know quite a few now. I chose to step back from it because I really didn't understand what they stood for or how much of a commitment the lodge wanted from me (I was swamped working in two education institutions and still do from time to time).

However, I understand a lot more about the craft and the traditional values the lodge promotes. As recently I've been reconsidering it.

Back to the thread, the more I think about it the more I think this isn't a religious matter, but a generational matter clothed in religion. Teen disobeys parent. Parent threatens teen with punishment. Teen continues to disobey parents. Parent chokes teen -- punishment over the top. [I'm not trying to make light of the situation; just sticking with what happened]

Good points, Franko. Honestly, I'd be more concerned about a teenager who doesn't see the world differently from their parents' paradigms. Some are more extreme than others but that's true of parents as well. But, truth be told, there's not much difference in either since the models first came out. It's how they're developed that makes them what they are.

Cheers

[Skilly]

franko said:

Trying to not say much here . . . guess I fail again.

The purpose of a religious group/charity -- like any non-charitable organization -- is to use the money raised for charitable purposes (isn't that circular!) -- not to build a bank account.

That's my only point ... and sorry to veer of topic. How do we know they are not building up bank accounts, which is what I am against. BC already stated that the RC church has 10-15 billion in reserves.

Anyhoo, in Canada we have religious freedom - which includes the freedom not to have a religion. And no right can be subjacated (sp?) by another right ... so an "honour" killing is still murder, and I hope "your honour" throws the book at him.

[franko]

Sure it can, Skilly. The Knights of Columbus were sued because they even though they are a religious entity and have strong views on the subject of homosexual marriages -- and their views are well knows as being part of the RC church, it was felt that they shouldn't have the right to refuse to rent their facilities to anyone, even those who want to celebrate what they are morally opposed to.

In Kingston? Brockville? [Dis?] a printer was sued for damages because he didn't want to print some pro-gay pamphlets, as he said they were against his principles as well. Not saying he was right (hey, a job is a job), but what would have been wrong with the ones who wanted the pamphlets printed going elsewhere? Instead, they made a big deal out of their "rights" being trampled on to have their work done anywhere they wanted . . . the courts found that their rights trumped the individual printers' rights.

As to the killing itself: whether it is Latimer or this family, murder is murder and the book should indeed be thrown.

As to the RC's reserves, I have no idea. If they are tied up in "investments" I have no idea . . . just believe that money given to a church is to be invested in people.

We don't know if money is being banked. But the government does. And our Canadian gov't at least, keeps close tabs on things like this -- believe me on that one!

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

skilly said:

badcompany said:

It's easy to take potshots at the religious, even fashionable, but it's rarely warranted in my opinion. And often it veers off into "well what about this case" kinds of arguments, like Skilly's position that the Vatican has too much money, and therefor all religions are bad, be they Christian, Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, whatever.

Whoa whoa whoa .... where did I say ALL religions are bad.

First, when you see data with regards to wealthy countries it is always per capita.

The title of the thread is "I don't understand religion" , not I don't understand Islam ... therefore the RC (and any other church is open to discussion).

Sure the church does good ... lots of good. The Salvation Army (who I have nothing but good words for in regards to their chairty work) are always the first to helpout families when disaters hit.

But when the church screws up .... well they screw up big time. Not the taking the odd snort from the wine bottle kind of screw up, or the skim a few dollars from the collection plate screw up either ... it is the hurt you where you can not find your self-esteem anymore type pain that one never recovers from.

As to Bill Gates ....

Mr. (Warren) Buffett plans to give away 85 percent of his fortune, or about $37.4 billion, all in Berkshire stock. Of that amount, he will channel the greatest share, about $31 billion, into the Gates Foundation. The Gates Foundation, dedicated to improving health and education, especially in poor nations, is already the United States' largest grant-making foundation, with current assets of almost $30 billion. Mr. Buffett's huge contribution may permanently solidify that philanthropy's standing as the biggest and most influential organization of its kind. Mr. Buffett will join Mr. and Mrs. Gates as a trustee of their foundation.



So Bill Gates' foundation he founded to give to less fortunate has 67.4 billion. If your estimates of the RC Church are correct (I chose that one because I was under the understanding it was the richest church in the world) than they have 1/5 in reserves of what the Gates Foundation has. I believe he donates about 3 billion a year (thats just a guess .... could be a whale of a lot more for all I know). Why did Buffett give his money to Gates and not either give it away himself or create his own foundation?

"Most people with this sum of money would try to create their own foundation in their own image; he's entrusting it to someone with whom he's had a good close relationship but who is 25 years his junior, who might be around to make sure it is used properly."

The Gates Foundation, dedicated to improving health and education, especially in poor nations,

Does Newfoundland qualify?

[franko]

habsfaninla said:

The Gates Foundation, dedicated to improving health and education, especially in poor nations,

Does Newfoundland qualify?

Not any more. Danny Williams is signing the deal that he swore he would never sign.

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

franko said:

habsfaninla said:

The Gates Foundation, dedicated to improving health and education, especially in poor nations,

Does Newfoundland qualify?

Not any more. Danny Williams is signing the deal that he swore he would never sign.

Good news for the good guys!
I haden't heard about him and looked him up. Bright man.

If he's really a hockey fan, would he be interested in the Canadiens GM job?

[Cranky]

I don't buy the "kids will be kids and dad overreacted". The father wanted to control the child upbringing based on race hate and religion.

Islam is where Christianity was 400 years ago. Irrelevant of the content of that religion, it is interpreted very aggressively and demands FAR too much influence in the daily lives of it's followers. The imams enjoy tremendous control over their "flock" to the point that we in the West would call it a cult. I use the word enjoy with a bag full of sarcasm. Let's face it, it's man who want power and get it by manipulating their religion.

Lastly...

Most of you here are multi generation Canadians and a bit detached from first generation immigrants thinking. I will let you on a little secret, a good percentage of immigrants PARTICULARLY those with strong religious beliefs don't want their children to be like those "lazy, stupid Canadians". I can tell you the contents of the conversation her father had with her and I am no psychic. It probably started with "you are not going to be like those Canadian whores and you will be a proper Muslim woman" and it degraded from there to murder. Daddy was not going to be embarrassed by his little girl turning into a Canadian/Western whore because where he came from, you KILLED them if they did not obey.

This is murder based on race hate, religion and unrelenting ignorance. Period. We got to get over this political correctness and call it what it is.

[Skilly]

franko said:

habsfaninla said:

The Gates Foundation, dedicated to improving health and education, especially in poor nations,

Does Newfoundland qualify?

Not any more. Danny Williams is signing the deal that he swore he would never sign.

Do you wanna start a new thread and get the truth on this matter..... he signed, but only because he wasn't going to toss away 67 million dollars. 67 million/year is a far cry from the $800 million a year we were promised.

BTW ... Newfoundland this year without Ottawa's promised money had an 800 million surplus ... and will be a have province late next year ... we aren't that poor anymore, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't get what was promised.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

habsaddict said:

I don't buy the "kids will be kids and dad overreacted". The father wanted to control the child upbringing based on race hate and religion.

This is the part of Islam that confuses me. There is no choice or no individual freedom when Islam is involved. You will conform or you will conform by the sword.

Let's face it, it's man who want power and get it by manipulating their religion.

Indeed. The Crusades were more about land-grabs and titles than they were about faith. Nowadays, George W. insists he talks directly to God, while many 3rd-world countries use a combination of faith and ignorance as a means for consolidating power.

Most of you here are multi generation Canadians and a bit detached from first generation immigrants thinking. I will let you on a little secret, a good percentage of immigrants PARTICULARLY those with strong religious beliefs don't want their children to be like those "lazy, stupid Canadians"

Well, I was on maneuvers in the Ottawa Valley a few years back. I had a chance to talk to a farmer, or a guy who is dedicated to putting food on our tables. He was kind of discouraged that the younger generations have a problem working 365 days of the year.

Now, I can tell you that while I was in Syria this was not a problem. Working every day of your life is actually an accepted way of life.

If you think some immigrants think we're lazy, you're bang on the mark here, HA. They come over here and immediately go into jobs that many ethnic Canadians (if there is such a thing nowadays) feel is either beneath them or too much work. How many immigrants do you see making a living by opening or taking over a franchise? The list of companies is endless. And, yes, some of them actually laugh at Canadians when we complain of unemployment.

That's an extreme mind you, but it's all around us whether we want to admit it or not. And, at times, I really don't blame these immigrants for laughing the way they do.

I can tell you the contents of the conversation her father had with her and I am no psychic. It probably started with "you are not going to be like those Canadian whores and you will be a proper Muslim woman" and it degraded from there to murder. Daddy was not going to be embarrassed by his little girl turning into a Canadian/Western whore because where he came from, you KILLED them if they did not obey.

Probably. There's a big difference between simply immigrating and trying to integrating. Hence we can argue that the girl's only crime was trying to integrate into a lifestyle she felt she was denied.

This is murder based on race hate, religion and unrelenting ignorance. Period. We got to get over this political correctness and call it what it is.

Or murder based on a deliberate reluctance to understand your blood and why they do what they are doing. On the surface it seems all that mattered to the father was the shame his daughter was bringing onto the family.

Terrible scenario. I'd like to hear all of the facts though.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

Well the Canadian Council of Imams is saying the murder was the result of domestic violence and that it had nothing to do with religious teachings.

Religion denied in girl's slaying

Imams speak out over killing

By JONATHAN JENKINS, SUN MEDIA

The Toronto Sun

Mississauga -- Islamic leaders met with the media yesterday to dispel what they said was the unfair association of the Muslim faith and a murder charge against a Mississauga father charged with strangling his daughter.

"We denounce this kind of act, categorically without any reservation," said Dr. Mohammad Alnadui, vice-chairman of the Canadian Council of Imams. "This is of course an un-Islamic thing. We in the community are very shocked by this kind of thing and can't understand what happened."

Aqsa Parvez, 16, was found fatally injured in her home around 8 a.m. Monday. Her father, Muhammad Parvez, 57, is in custody and expected to face a charge of second-degree murder.

The victim's brother, Waqas Parvez, is charged with obstructing police and will appear in court today.

Peel police have not said what they believe the motive is in the case but many of Aqsa's friends say the teen was rebelling against her parents' conservative ways, shunning the hijab and dressing in western styles. She had also moved away from home and was staying with a friend in the days before she was killed.

Her family has denied not wearing the hijab was an issue in the conflict.

Alnadui said it's quite possible for a young woman to be a devout Muslim and not wear the traditional headscarf, saying it was up to parents to educate children about the value of dressing modestly.

"It's not for us to force them," he said. "If they're convinced and they go in the same direction, that is good."

Sheikh Alaa Elsayed, with the Islamic Centre of Canada, agreed that wearing the hijab is a personal choice but said it's clear in the Koran it's a good thing to do.

"We talk about the benefits of the hijab," Elsayed said. "We say simply that we deal with a woman as a higher type of a human being.

"When I see a woman that is covered, I look at her as a soul, a person, a mentality, not a physical or sexual object."

He said he would encourage any family having tension over the issue to try to talk the problems out but stopped short of saying families whose daughters take off the hijab should feel no shame.

Elsayed said while he didn't want to talk about Aqsa's case specifically while it was still before the courts, he felt it has little if anything to do with religion and was simply a case of domestic violence, an issue he said he would address in his sermon today.

Mohammad Ashraf, secretary general of the Islamic Society of North America, said the status of women in Islam is misunderstood in North America.

"It's being reported in the media that all woman are being forced, that they are subjugated and they need to be liberated," Ashraf said. "In Islam, women were liberated 1,400 years ago. Islam gives more rights to the women than western countries."

Danyal Kaimkhann, a friend of Aqsa's at Applewood Heights Secondary School, said the story is whipping up sentiment against the Muslim community.

"I've seen so many articles that are anti-Islamic," he said. "They talk about how Pakistani families are abusive. I don't think that because I'm from a Pakistani family myself and I've never seen that. My sisters have never been through that."

The Link

Interesting comments. "In Islam, women were liberated 1,400 years ago. Islam gives more rights to the women than western countries.

When I was in Damascus back in '96 I noticed women in everything from full burqas and full-facial hijabs to designer jeans and heels. However, as we gradually ventured further away from Damascus the more fundemental or devout the beliefs became. We made it to Hama where every woman was clad in a hijab and/or burqa. In short, the amount of religion practiced by the husband dictated how the wife would dress.

However, I challenge the Imam's comments that women have more freedoms under Islam. Women were non-entities under the Taliban. When asked why he was using a soccer stadium the UN built for his town to execute a woman, the young Taliban simply replied:

"... if the UN had built me a place to carry out the executions I wouldn't have to use the stadium ..."

[BadCompany]

I don't buy the "kids will be kids and dad overreacted". The father wanted to control the child upbringing based on race hate and religion...

.... Most of you here are multi generation Canadians and a bit detached from first generation immigrants thinking. I will let you on a little secret, a good percentage of immigrants PARTICULARLY those with strong religious beliefs don't want their children to be like those "lazy, stupid Canadians". I can tell you the contents of the conversation her father had with her and I am no psychic. It probably started with "you are not going to be like those Canadian whores and you will be a proper Muslim woman" and it degraded from there to murder. Daddy was not going to be embarrassed by his little girl turning into a Canadian/Western whore because where he came from, you KILLED them if they did not obey.

You seem to be contradicting yourself here though. On one hand, you say that it's not a case of a father over-reacting, but then you talk about the conversation that "degraded from there to murder." This is exactly what I say - a father tried to control his teenager, and in a fit of rage, ended up strangling her to death. Many fathers have unfortunately felt the same way, and many still have actually acted on that impulse of rage. Homer Simpson does it to Bart every episode.

As for the immigrant bit, I have no doubt you are right. But again, you're contradicting yourself. It's a cultural thing, not a race or religion thing. It's also a parental thing. All parents try to control their child's upbringing, it's called parenting. Yes, race, religion, culture and parenting are intertwined, but not completely, and it's far from being a Muslim thing. Many Asian parents, to rely on an old stereotype, "force" their kids to put education above all else, to study hard and to do long hours of homework while their lazy, western friends play hockey outside. Cripes, Tim Hortons made a commercial out of it all ("You play left wing. Give me back my picture.")

“Teen rebellion is something that exists in all households in Canada and is not unique to any culture or background,” CAIR-CAN’s Sameer Zuberi said in an interview. “Domestic violence is also not unique to Muslims.”

The death of Aqsa “was the result of domestic violence, a problem that cuts across Canadian society and is blind to color or creed,” echoed Shahina Siddiqui, president of the Islamic Social Services Association.

Until otherwise, this is what it (sadly) seems to me to have happened. Unless there is proof that the father plotted to kill his daughter, to protect his honour, I'm just going to assume that this murder is no different from the many similar murders that happen all the time...

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

badcompany said:

I don't buy the "kids will be kids and dad overreacted". The father wanted to control the child upbringing based on race hate and religion...

.... Most of you here are multi generation Canadians and a bit detached from first generation immigrants thinking. I will let you on a little secret, a good percentage of immigrants PARTICULARLY those with strong religious beliefs don't want their children to be like those "lazy, stupid Canadians". I can tell you the contents of the conversation her father had with her and I am no psychic. It probably started with "you are not going to be like those Canadian whores and you will be a proper Muslim woman" and it degraded from there to murder. Daddy was not going to be embarrassed by his little girl turning into a Canadian/Western whore because where he came from, you KILLED them if they did not obey.

You seem to be contradicting yourself here though. On one hand, you say that it's not a case of a father over-reacting, but then you talk about the conversation that "degraded from there to murder." This is exactly what I say - a father tried to control his teenager, and in a fit of rage, ended up strangling her to death. Many fathers have unfortunately felt the same way, and many still have actually acted on that impulse of rage. Homer Simpson does it to Bart every episode.

As for the immigrant bit, I have no doubt you are right. But again, you're contradicting yourself. It's a cultural thing, not a race or religion thing. It's also a parental thing. All parents try to control their child's upbringing, it's called parenting. Yes, race, religion, culture and parenting are intertwined, but not completely, and it's far from being a Muslim thing. Many Asian parents, to rely on an old stereotype, "force" their kids to put education above all else, to study hard and to do long hours of homework while their lazy, western friends play hockey outside. Cripes, Tim Hortons made a commercial out of it all ("You play left wing. Give me back my picture.")

“Teen rebellion is something that exists in all households in Canada and is not unique to any culture or background,” CAIR-CAN’s Sameer Zuberi said in an interview. “Domestic violence is also not unique to Muslims.”

The death of Aqsa “was the result of domestic violence, a problem that cuts across Canadian society and is blind to color or creed,” echoed Shahina Siddiqui, president of the Islamic Social Services Association.

Until otherwise, this is what it (sadly) seems to me to have happened. Unless there is proof that the father plotted to kill his daughter, to protect his honour, I'm just going to assume that this murder is no different from the many similar murders that happen all the time...

I think you really missed the point here.
This is like saying it would be the same for any french canadian father if his daughter refused to wear a head scarf. NOT!

Not all muslims are murderers, but a disproportionately large number of them concentrated in specific sects are violent intolerant killers.
There are not one or two muslim suicide bombers, but thousands of them, and even while they are dieing off, there are more replacing them. This is not true of Jews, Hindus, Christians, and Bhuddists.
Of course there are some peaceful pious Muslims, but the whole world faces a serious problem with radical muslims and gentle kindness and negotiation is not the answer.

[BadCompany]

Actually, I think you are missing the point. The point is fathers kill their kids all the time, fathers from all walks of life, races and religions. As I said above, a lot of the times the reasons seem pretty stupid - don't like their friends, hanging around with a bad crowd, had premarital sex, drugs, dropped out of high school. Or, the most common reason of them all, because their mothers got a new boyfriend.

How many white fathers have killed their daughters for dating black men? Would a French Canadian kill his daughter for wearing a scarf? Nope, probably not. But how many of them disowned them for dating an anglo? How many laid their fists on them, for kissing a boy from the wrong neighborhood?

Regardless of how many suicide bombers there may be in the world, there is still nothing that says this particular incident was nothing more than a crime of passion, a deranged father pushed too far. I still don't see the need to deport all Muslims "because their religion is bad and they all kill their daughters for not wearing scarves."

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

badcompany said:

Actually, I think you are missing the point. The point is fathers kill their kids all the time, fathers from all walks of life, races and religions. As I said above, a lot of the times the reasons seem pretty stupid - don't like their friends, hanging around with a bad crowd, had premarital sex, drugs, dropped out of high school. Or, the most common reason of them all, because their mothers got a new boyfriend.

How many white fathers have killed their daughters for dating black men? Would a French Canadian kill his daughter for wearing a scarf? Nope, probably not. But how many of them disowned them for dating an anglo? How many laid their fists on them, for kissing a boy from the wrong neighborhood?

Regardless of how many suicide bombers there may be in the world, there is still nothing that says this particular incident was nothing more than a crime of passion, a deranged father pushed too far. I still don't see the need to deport all Muslims "because their religion is bad and they all kill their daughters for not wearing scarves."

Sorry BC. I don't recall advocating the deportation of all Muslims because their religeon is bad or because they kill their daughters.

Every year in the US a couple of kids take a gun to school and shoot a few of their teachers and classmates that made fun of them.
Every month, some black kid in Los Angeles shoots another black kid for wearing a blue scaft around his neck instead of a red one. Bloods and Cripts are not Muslims.
Christians went to the crusades for vengence and profit.
Japanese kamakaze pilots devoted their lives to the Emperor.

This particular shooting however was a Muslim father killing a Muslim daughter because she took off her scarf. It was Muslim religeon related. It certainly does not mean that all other religeons or races do not have problems too.
The question arises; should we racially profile offenders.
My answer is an emphatic yes! Not because I hate any particular race, religeon or group. Simply because:
a) a Canadian journalist in Basra needs to take greater precautions for his safety than a journalist in Mississauga.
b) a Muslim is more likely to be a suicide bomber and eventual martyr than a Mormon.
c) a Kenyan in the Olympics is more likely to win a gold medal in a distance race than in figure skating
d) a tourist from Iceland is less likely to become an undocumented illegal alien than one from Mexico
We should not arrest all Mexican tourists because some of them MAY be undocumented. We should however recognize that the likelihood of capturing illegal aliens is greater along the Rio Grande and that's where we should concentrate our Border Patrol. It's not because of racism. It's pragmatism. Profiling is a necessary evil.

ps. I can not envision any circumstances whatsoever, where I would kill my daughter. I very much doubt that you would either. We were not raised that way. We both must recognize that there are some of bad people that find nothing wrong in beating a woman, wife or daughter for what we might consider minor offenses. There are thousands of people that took to the streets to insist a teacher be killed because she allowed her students to name a Teddy Bear. Not one or two isolated individuals, but thousands. We need to be cautious and prudent and if some innocents are hurt for the protection of the majority; it not only is accepted, it is anticipated.
Radical Islam is a problem. I never advocated rounding up all Muslims, but capturing and prosecuting one or two is akin to extracting a thimble full of the ocean to lower the world's sea level.
LOL Now you have me waiting for my daughter to come home and tell me she met a nice boy from France. My answer to her is "it's OK, as long as he plays in nets for the Hab's."
;D

[Disgruntled70sHab]

badcompany said:

“Teen rebellion is something that exists in all households in Canada and is not unique to any culture or background,” CAIR-CAN’s Sameer Zuberi said in an interview. “Domestic violence is also not unique to Muslims.”

The death of Aqsa “was the result of domestic violence, a problem that cuts across Canadian society and is blind to color or creed,” echoed Shahina Siddiqui, president of the Islamic Social Services Association.

Until otherwise, this is what it (sadly) seems to me to have happened. Unless there is proof that the father plotted to kill his daughter, to protect his honour, I'm just going to assume that this murder is no different from the many similar murders that happen all the time...

Had to jump in here BC. I read that the police were looking to see if there was enough evidence to upgrade the 2nd-degree murder to 1st-degree murder. If they can't find enough then I think a 2nd-degree charge would probably fall along the lines what you're suggesting; a murder of passion or rage rather than calculation.

I can agree with the Mullah is that domestic violence is not unique to the Muslim culture. However, you mentioned the "honour" aspect. More often than not, this is the motivation that accounts for a lot of abuse women take in some of these countries. For instance, I just read a story yesterday where a Saudi woman was gang-raped, but still has to undergo 200 lashes.

Saudi Arabia: Rape victim challenges 200-lash punishment

Citizen News Services

Published: Thursday, November 22, 2007

A Saudi woman sentenced to six months in jail and 200 lashes despite being gang raped has vowed to challenge the ruling in a case that has received wide publicity, embarrassing the Saudi government. The case "sums up the major problems that the Saudi judiciary faces," said the young woman's lawyer, Abdurrahman al-Lahem. The 19-year-old's identity has not been revealed, but she has become known as "Qatif girl," after the Shiite-populated area of Al-Qatif in the Eastern Province from which she hails. After the rape in October 2006, she was sentenced to 90 lashes for having been in a car with a man who is not a relative. The Higher Judicial Council granted a retrial, but on Nov. 14, a court toughened her sentence to six months in jail and 200 lashes because of "her attempt to aggravate and influence the judiciary through the media."

© The Ottawa Citizen 2007

However, any woman who is raped in these countries often brings dishonour to her household. I served in the Middle East for the first time back in '82 and we heard of a rape that happened the year before. The three men were executed, while the girl brought so much shame to her family that her father hung her from a bridge in their village.

I guess I'm trying to say that her death could very well be the result of domestic violence. I'm not saying we're immune to it in our culture, but there's a history of domestic violence in a lot of these countries. I feel the problem is, while many feel this is simply domestic violence, there are underlying motives to it. You only mentioned one such motive; honour.

A lot of this violence can be attributed to that motive actually.

Cheers.

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

skilly said:

franko said:

Not any more. Danny Williams is signing the deal that he swore he would never sign.

Do you wanna start a new thread and get the truth on this matter..... he signed, but only because he wasn't going to toss away 67 million dollars. 67 million/year is a far cry from the $800 million a year we were promised.

BTW ... Newfoundland this year without Ottawa's promised money had an 800 million surplus ... and will be a have province late next year ... we aren't that poor anymore, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't get what was promised.

Obviously Ottawa wants to stay under the cap.

[Skilly]

disgruntled70shab said:

Had to jump in here BC. I read that the police were looking to see if there was enough evidence to upgrade the 2nd-degree murder to 1st-degree murder. If they can't find enough then I think a 2nd-degree charge would probably fall along the lines what you're suggesting; a murder of passion or rage rather than calculation.

Which means nothing really Dis ...

If the crown seeks second degree murder rather than first degree murder is does not mean it wasn't planned. It only means the crown would rather a lower burden of proof. The only real way they can "prove" he planned it, is if the brother or mother come forth. And what are the odds on that? The brother obstructed justice to protect the father, or as someone stated maybe the brother did it and the father is taken the fall and the brother obstructed because he wanted to confess?? And the mother ... well she is a woman. "Open your mouth and you'll end up like Asqa".

If it truly was a crime of passion - which I highly doubt - then yes, second degree murder .... but most "crimes of passion" I believe end up as manslaughter. Why do I believe this wasn't a crime of passion? A crime of passion is called such because it is momentary first response when a person "loses it". This man from all accounts had been fighting with his daughter over a prolonged period of time .... this was not a first response. This was something stewing, festering, on his mind.....

[Disgruntled70sHab]

Mr. Mansur weighs in.

Salim Mansur

Sat, December 15, 2007

Bigotry, terror masked as faith

By SALIM MANSUR

News stories of Muslims -- and from the Muslim world -- continue to be deplorable and to reveal how terribly the malady of a broken civilization is consuming its own people, while threatening the freedom and security of others.

In the Greater Toronto Area a Muslim father, in a rage over his teenage daughter not complying with his fundamentalist belief -- the wearing of prescribed garments for women in public -- allegedly strangled her to death.

This is the latest of seemingly endless atrocities committed by Muslims, and from the Muslim world, with the most vulnerable victims being women and children.

The cold-blooded murder of 16-year-old Aqsa Parvez was not like any other crime that cuts across ethnic and faith boundaries, as Muslim apologists in Canada will do their best to characterize it.

The murder was prompted by an ideology of bigotry and terror masked as a faith-tradition -- an ideology of radical Islamism at war with the modern world of freedom and democracy.

The fear of this perverted ideology and its fanatical promoters silences most Muslims, regardless of their numbers in society, for they fear that speaking out against this ideology might place them in greater jeopardy within their community and with those who claim its leadership.

Then there are Muslim organizations -- such as the Canadian Islamic Congress (CIC) -- in free societies such as Canada. Their deafening silence in condemning Muslim violence against Muslims and non-Muslims alike is revealing of their true nature.

These are front organizations for global radical Islamism making apologies for their ideological brethren, and directing polemics against the West for victimizing Muslims and undermining Islam.

Moreover, they are fraudulent in their claims of representing Muslims in general as the CIC does. The fact is, on the contrary, most Muslims in Canada and elsewhere in the West left their native lands to escape from unmitigated cruelty, heartlessness and hypocrisy of Muslim rulers and religious leaders.

But these organizations are sinister in their objectives of taking full advantage of free societies and subverting their institutions for the purpose of undermining freedom and democracy.

For instance, Canadians have never heard from or witnessed Muslim organizations such as the CIC publicly mobilizing Canadian Muslims in denouncing suicide-bombings, honour killings of hapless women, genocide on display in Darfur and persecution of dissident Muslims in the Arab-Muslim world.

Instead, as fraudsters they have developed the swindler's art of blackmailing free societies as the CIC has done by filing complaints with the Human Rights Commissions (HRC) federally, and in Ontario and British Columbia, against Maclean's magazine and one of its contributors, Mark Steyn.

The complaints are frivolous, claiming Maclean's defamed Canadian Muslims by publishing some writings of Steyn as excerpts from his best-selling book, America Alone.

But the greater frivolity is the HRC's willingness to hear the complaint from an organization whose president, Mohamed Elmasry, is on public record in Canada for the suggestion -- though later retracted under duress -- that Israelis in general over the age of 18 are legitimate targets for Palestinian suicide-bombers.

The murder of Aqsa Parvez and of countless other women among Muslims will continue not merely because Muslims cower in silence in their fear of radical Islamists, but also for the apathy of the Western public and politicians supinely appeasing and accommodating Muslim organizations such as the CIC.

The story