Thursday, October 26, 2006

Abandoned meat

In what can only be described as religious morality gone insane, a Muslim “leader” in Australia blames women for sex attacks by likening immodest dress as abandoned meat that attracts voracious animals. Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali was referring to a vicious gang rape when he made his comments.

In a Ramadan sermon that has outraged Muslim women leaders, Sydney-based Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali also alluded to the infamous Sydney gang rapes, suggesting the attackers were not entirely to blame.

While not specifically referring to the rapes, brutal attacks on four women for which a group of young Lebanese men received long jail sentences, Sheik Hilali said there were women who "sway suggestively" and wore make-up and immodest dress ... "and then you get a judge without mercy (rahma) and gives you 65 years".

Source: The Australian - Muslim leader blames women for sex attacks

So… the rapists were not at fault? Have they no self control? Of course, the answer is that is Islam, self control is not part of the theology. Removing temptation is a central tenant. So, if a woman fails to remove the temptation by choosing to appear in public without a veil, she’s asking for the rape. This twisted logic would paint the poor unfortunate Muslim rapists as not in control of their own lust. Perhpas they should not have been judged so harshly. Perhaps probation would have been a better idea.

Muslim logic:

In the religious address on adultery to about 500 worshippers in Sydney last month, Sheik Hilali said: "If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it ... whose fault is it, the cats or the uncovered meat?

"The uncovered meat is the problem."

Oh really? Are Muslim men cats? Because, last time I checked, cats did not know the difference between right and wrong. Men on the other hand, know the difference between right and wrong. A rapist knows what he is doing is wrong. Hell, men should know that eating abondoned meat is not a good idea. Would a Muslim man eat abondoned bacon?

Note to Muslims: It is NEVER the victims fault.

Questions for consideration: Why is it that Muslims choose to remove temptation over exhibiting self control? How is is possible that an Atheist can clearly see the moral ramifications of "blame the victim" thinking when a religious person cannot?


beepbeepitsme said...

Yup, this is what happens when people's religious/cultural beliefs are not compatible with the laws of a secular country.

Unfortunately, there are enough numbnuts in the world who aren't muslim, who agree with him.

The standard operating procedure for people like this, is to blame the victim.

Vile Blasphemer said...

I've been robbed at gunpoint twice in my life... does this mean I shouldn't wear a suit in Chicago after 8pm?

Mojoey said...

beepbeep - Political correctness is insane - why cater to beliefs that will undermine liberty? it makes no sense.

Mojoey said...

VB - of course, everyone knows you must change into your Dockers after 8pm. You were asking for it you suit-wearing tease.

brad said...

In fact the bible (Christianity) deals with the problem of sin completely from a different perspective. Christianity teaches that "out of the heart comes wickedness, adultery,...". Jesus said, "it is not what goes into a person that defiles him but what comes out. For out of the heart comes...". That is why Christians believe the path to righteousness is the Holy Spirit and vehemently oppose law as a means to righteousness. The point is righteousness comes from the inner part of a person (called his or her spirit) and not from without via law. Islam is about law and therefore blames the society and its lack of good law for all our sin.

Paul even said it this way "I said for you to seperate from sinners but only sinners who call themselves Christians (hypocrites) not sinners in the world. For then how could we love the world". Paul and the early Christians always hung out with sinners and were in no way effected negatively by that but positively. Hanging out with needy people gives one the opportunity to love. Another example is Jesus Himself who was criticized for hanging out with gangsters and prostitutes. A key principle of Christianity is that if we touch the world, we are not made unclean but instead the world is made clean. The example of this is that Jesus touched lepers and the sick and they became clean. The examples can go on and on as to how Christianity is the exact opposite in principle and practice than Islam. All religion is not the same. There is bad religion and there is good religion. Bad religion is worse than no religion at all.

love ya, brad

Mojoey said...

Brad, I see the difference clearly. However, many do not. The Christian “accept all paths to god” philosophy that passed for political correctness here in America (and I assume in Australia) grants tacit approval of Muslim concepts that our counter to the health of our democracy. If Christians recognize Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali behavior as morally wrong and at odds with the core teachings of Christianity, would it not follow that Christians call the Sheik to account for his faulty logic? Christian outrage would be off the scale if one of our politicians made the same outrageous claim. Why is it then that Christians are absent from this discussion? Why do they instead focus on stopping gay marriage when something as blatant at the Sheik’s comments goes uncontested?

I don’t get it.

Anonymous said...

The "blame the victim" mentality also ignores the fact that many rapes occur not out of lust, but from want of power. Rape is not just about a guy wanting to get off and being "tempted" by a woman wearing revealing clothes--it is about wanting to violate the woman, have power over her, incapacitate her. It is not about lack of self-control in the slightest--on the contrary, the rapist is in total control, and enjoys it.