what was the old "low" in honor killings?

just curious...

...the recent case in Iraq of a kidnapped teenager whose kidnappers *threatened* to rape her being murdered by her family after she returned home because people might have thought she did get raped was a pretty low moment.

Not as bad as murdering 7 year olds, but pretty fucking bad.

I hate to say it, but honor killings based on presumption are nothing new; this case just happened to make international headlines. Last month I mentioned a son who killed his mother in '95 simply because she wanted to remarry. Was there proof positive of the supposed dishonor in the each of the hundreds of other cases? I suspect the answer is no. The bottom line is prosecutors need to prosecute irrespective of the involved family's wishes.

I wasn't expecting a literal answer, but since we're ranking lows and highs in honor killings...

what is the "high"?

What wasn't stated in the Broadsheet article was that the mother was made to watch her young daughters being murdered while she held their three-month-old son in her arms. It seems to me that the father was willing to "suffer" having daughters just so that he'd have some sort of progeny....but once his son was born, those girls were seen as nothing but an all-too-expendable liability.

Honor, schmonor. He really did it because all those daughters represented an economic liability to him, period. And he'll probably get away with it for the most part.

Yeah - I agree that this is using "honour" as an economic excuse.

The fact that guy now has a boy - so why feed and clothe and house girls?

If he was truely worried that "his" females mght have sex and dishonour him someday - he'd would have killed his wife too.

But then who would bear him the future boys, and clean his dirty skivies?

I do not understand how and why people think like this, but my bigger question is why does the world at large consider human violations of females "cultural" and not what it is - gross human rights violations. Mistreatment based on race and religion etc, are consider human right violations. But if they are female - oh well - just a cultural thing!

President G W Bush used both Afghani and Iraqi women's fate as justification to wage war against those countries.

And what is worse - Iraqi women stand to have less rights under our shiney new "democracy" than they did under the dictatorship.

And as far as Afgani women go - apparently BushCo was not reading about the Taliban in the 90's, because they didn't seem to discover the plight of the women there until after 911.

Maybe in the 90's they were too obsessed with someone's penis to notice what was happening to women around the world.

as to how slitting your children's throats, whatever they've done, does not bring dishonor to your family, Muslim or not.

Because he is a "poor" man, all he has is his family honor.

In particular his four year old daughter seemed destined to

be a slut. Surely Allah will recieve him as he does

suicide bombers who murder four year old girls.

When will the Koran be available at Big Box store in

English translation?