I know. And as a historian I have read more atrocity stories than most. But the details of this one are beyond anyhting even I have come across. What I would ask is: suppose this man were within reach of Western justice, what punishment would suit what he has done? Usually I would say: life in jail without parole. (Not only am I against the death penalty, but jail without parole can be a worse punishment.) But in this case, the accumulation of obscenity upon blasphemy, blasphemy upon cruelty, cruelty upon unnaturalness, unnaturalness upon perversion, reaches depths that human justice cannot match. If I did not believe in divine punishment and everlasting Hell, this sort of thing would make me despair.
Unless you stop putting words and thoughts into my mouth, I shall ban you from commenting. I expect an apology forthwith for the insults in this comment.
You are not only ascribing views to me that I despise, but you are crassly falsifying history to suit your wretched prejudices. Go masturbate with Richard Dawkins. As for me, you are deleted and banned.
This is not humanity. This object has renounced all connection with humanity, except for the purely zoological description, homo sapiens. An anencephalic baby that will never develop a brain is more human than this object is.
Every time I start to think that we can live with Islam if we just eliminate a few extremist organizations so the moderates can come to the fore, something like this happens and I start getting that sick dread that we might find that Islam itself is the problem.
I don't want it to be the case, but if the majority in a religion doesn't acknowledge that freedom of religion includes the freedom to leave the faith, can there be peace with them in the long term?
Moderate Muslims are constantly in fear of being accused of not being Muslim (there is a specific word for this, but I can't remember it): and they accept the right of the radicals to make this decision. As long as that is the case, there's no hope. *If* the moderates had and used the power to expel the extremists, then it could be different. I guess. But I suspect that the 'moderates' I've meet have in their heart of hearts believed that the extremists were the 'real' Muslims.
The one thing missing from the story is the response of authorities. Does anyone know what, if any, action is being taken against the father?
If, as in the past, the Saudi's do not take action, then it depresses me that this is a country regarded as a 'friend of the west'. What happened to the idea of an ethical foreign policy?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 11:44 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 12:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 02:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 02:24 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 12:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 12:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-18 08:26 pm (UTC)I don't want it to be the case, but if the majority in a religion doesn't acknowledge that freedom of religion includes the freedom to leave the faith, can there be peace with them in the long term?
no subject
Date: 2008-08-19 06:24 am (UTC)*If* the moderates had and used the power to expel the extremists, then it could be different. I guess. But I suspect that the 'moderates' I've meet have in their heart of hearts believed that the extremists were the 'real' Muslims.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 10:16 am (UTC)If, as in the past, the Saudi's do not take action, then it depresses me that this is a country regarded as a 'friend of the west'. What happened to the idea of an ethical foreign policy?