I knew Dymphna was asking for trouble last night when she posted about the honor killings in Texas.
Some of our commenters think I should pressure my wife not to post certain opinions. That would not only be a foolish thing for a husband to do, it would be inconsistent with Gates of Vienna policy. If I let Fjordman, Paul Weston, Mr. Smith, Kepiblanc, and others contribute pieces for this blog with which I do not entirely agree, how can I justify suppressing my own wife?
Which I couldn’t do anyway, even if I tried.
For the record: I don’t consider “honor killing” to be a crime of passion; it’s cold-blooded premeditated murder.
As for the possible prevalence until recently of the same practice within European culture, I can’t venture an opinion, since I lack data on it. If any more knowledgeable readers want to weigh in on the topic, please feel free to do so. Leave links, if you can, to help people investigate further on their own.
However, I think it’s important to recognize that honor killing is not specifically a Muslim phenomenon. It is widespread in other tribal cultures as well. Take, for example, the recent Hindu honor killings in the Chicago area as pointed out by Esther:
The Hindu caste system was outlawed in India years ago, but prosecutors say that system played a role in the mind of the man who set the fire that killed his own pregnant daughter, 3-year-old grandson and the son-in-law prosecutors say he didn’t like.
– – – – – – – – –
In a hearing at the Markham courthouse Tuesday morning, Cook County Judge Martin McDonough ordered Oak Forest’s Subhash Chander, 57, held without bond in connection with the arson and killing of Chander’s pregnant daughter Monika Rani, 22; her husband Rajesh Kumar, 30; and their son Vansh.
This was the third Chicago-area case in one year involving an Indian family, domestic violence and fire. NBC 5 asked counselors who serve the Indian community about that on Wednesday.
Other barbaric customs that are practiced by Muslims are not specifically Islamic. Female genital mutilation, for example, is an African tribal practice which has gained Islamic sanction over the centuries. But it’s not universal in Muslim countries, nor does it find its origins in the Koran.
Islam’s role in these barbaric atavisms is to fix them in place for all time. When any given culture is taken over by Islam, its prevalent customs — provided they do not directly contradict the basic tenets of Islam — are absorbed into sharia and given Koranic sanction.
Once that happens, they cannot be changed. The legitimacy of the Prophet’s words is laid upon them, and restricting them becomes a crime against Islam.
This is one of the characteristics that makes Islam so dangerous to the rest of us — it preserves as if in amber the repugnant practices of a thousand years ago. Slavery, mutilation, murder, pillage: all are justified by scripture, and any modification by mere human beings is heresy.
Hindus living in this country can, one assumes, be eventually assimilated to our way of life and deterred from such barbarous behavior, just as Mormon men learned to make do with a maximum of one wife apiece.
But Muslims have a built-in command structure that requires them to resist such changes, and the barbaric ideology known as “Multiculturalism” requires us to tolerate their ways.
It’s a circle that can’t be squared.