Stoning in Iraq

The BBQ Pit
121

[QUOTE=buttonjockey308]

Your lack of comfort with assertions of cultural superiority does not negate the existance of superiority. As a person, I am the very same as the man who threw the first stone (her uncle, according to fessie. Yikes!) As a member of Western Society, I can say that the culture in which I live, while flawed in many ways, is superior to that of the culture that allows, and condones this horrible activity.
[/QUOTE]

And then you can comfortably go back to playing down the less important “flaws” in your own culture that leave millions of people physically and sexually abused as children and adults, that results in the rape and murder of little girls and their entire families during wartime, that fails to care for its sick unless a profit can be made off it, that is built on the bones of the American Indian genocide and the slave trade…but hey, at least we haven’t ganged up and publicly executed anyone in like decades! Mostly!

122

[QUOTE=Sailboat]

Those of us in America who would condemn all Iraqis or all Kurds or all Muslims for this stoning had better be prepared, ourselves, to pay the same penalty for the death of Matthew Shepard. Don’t argue that you personally are innocent – our society “is capable of” that kind of killing just as much as “their society” “is capable of” honor killings.

[/QUOTE]

How many times do we have to explain the difference? There is no comparison here.

Matthew Shepard was killed by 2 individuals who were arrested and are spending thier life in jail. He was not beaten by several people including family members, while a whole community and the police looked on.

Yes, our culture has elements that are anti-gay. Occaisonally a few bad individuals act out violently.

Our culture as a whole does not accept, or require, the ritual beating to death of certain individuals for non offenses, based on religion and tradition. Some others do.

Our “society” didn’t kill Matthew Shepard, 2 deranged men did. Thier “society” did kill that poor girl.

123

“Society” is made of individuals.

124

[QUOTE=Sailboat]

Those of us in America who would condemn all Iraqis or all Kurds or all Muslims for this stoning had better be prepared, ourselves, to pay the same penalty for the death of Matthew Shepard. Don’t argue that you personally are innocent – our society “is capable of” that kind of killing just as much as “their society” “is capable of” honor killings.

[/QUOTE]

How many times do we have to explain the difference? There is no comparison here.

Matthew Shepard was killed by 2 individuals who were arrested and are spending thier life in jail. He was not beaten by several people including family members, while a whole community and the police looked on.

Yes, our culture has elements that are anti-gay. Occaisonally a few bad individuals act out violently.

Our culture as a whole does not accept, or require, the ritual beating to death of certain individuals for non offenses, based on religion and tradition. Some others do.

Our “society” didn’t kill Matthew Shepard, 2 deranged men did. Thier “society” did kill that poor girl.

125

[QUOTE=Ensign Edison]
Nor is that comment relevant to this thread.
[/QUOTE]
Huh? I was passing on information about the status of Calley, since another poster mentioned him.

And you can debate whatever issues you like, including alleged cultural superiorities/inferiorities. I wasn’t going there, and in general tu quoque arguments disgust me, although not as much as stoning.

126

[QUOTE=Jackmannii]
Huh? I was passing on information about the status of Calley, since another poster mentioned him.
[/quote]

I was responding to this:

I thought I was pretty clear. You made a comment which seemed to be summarizing this thread as a debate over whether one may express disgust over support for stoning women. I replied that that’s not what it’s about at all. If I misunderstood, I apologize, though I’d be curious what you did mean to say with that comment.

Uh, if someone’s argument is based on the idea that they wouldn’t do it too (hence making them superior), then talking about whether they wouldn’t isn’t tu quoque, it’s engaging them on their own terms.

127

Are we not the people who set fire to Tokyo, with the deliberate design of roasting as many civilians as possible? Was there a hue and cry from the people, denunciations from our pulpits? As Curtis LeMay noted, if we lost that war everyone who signed off on that would have been tried for war crimes. We knew what we were doing, we did it anyway.

Perhaps there is some subtlety of horror between stoning and roasting, but if there is, it escapes me.

128

Just a nitpick on an important sociocultural detail that doesn’t seem to have fully penetrated in this thread:

YAZIDIS ARE NOT MUSLIMS.

The Yazidi beliefs seem to be sort of distantly derived from a combination of Greek Manichaeanism and Zoroastrianism, with elements of Judaism, Nestorian Christianity, and Islam thrown in:

Yes, the practice of honor killings is prevalent in a lot of Middle Eastern Muslim communities (as it is in many Christian and other non-Muslim communities in the same region). But the perpetrators and victim of this particular act did not happen to be members of any Muslim community, so in itself this particular act says nothing about the barbarity or otherwise of “Muslim culture”.

129

[QUOTE=elucidator]
As Curtis LeMay noted, if we lost that war everyone who signed off on that would have been tried for war crimes. We knew what we were doing, we did it anyway.

Perhaps there is some subtlety of horror between stoning and roasting, but if there is, it escapes me.
[/QUOTE]
McNamara said the same in The Fog of War

Robert McNamara: I was on the island of Guam in his
[General Curtis LeMays’]
Robert McNamara: command in March 1945. In that single night, we burned to death one hundred thousand Japanese civilians in Tokyo. Men, women and children.
Interviewer: Were you aware this was going to happen?
Robert McNamara: Well, I was part of a mechanism that, in a sense, recommended it.
[regarding his and Colonel Curtis LeMay’s involvement in the bombing of Japan during World War II]
Robert McNamara: LeMay said if we lost the war that we would have all been prosecuted as war criminals. And I think he’s right. He… and I’d say I… were behaving as war criminals.
Robert McNamara: LeMay recognized that what he was doing would be thought immoral if his side has lost.
Robert McNamara: But what makes it immoral if you lose and not immoral if you win?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0317910/quotes

130

[QUOTE=fessie]
Back to this particular stoning — an article in the Chicago Tribune said that her Uncle was most likely the ringleader. Her own Uncle!

Her Father tried to protect her by sending her to a priest’s house to hide, but she was abducted by her Uncle and a couple of other men. And then murdered.

Knowing what we’ve seen in American culture with “funny Uncles” (i.e., lotsa molestation), it makes me wonder if that’s a problem in Iraq, too. Does anyone know if it’s possible she was being molested by him?
[/QUOTE]

Honour killings being carried out, or at least planned, by the immediate family is pretty much the whole point. It’s their family that they see as having been shamed and their ‘duty’ to rectify it. I’d imagine that the wider community would probably have been happy with just shunning the transgressor - or maybe I’m just hoping…

131

buttonjockey:

Hey, if you’re going to insult me, you’ll have to try a damn sight harder than that!

:slight_smile:

No apology necessary.

This is a strange method for estimating the size of the American Legion. May I suggest that instead of measuring the American Legion on the basis of a single court case, we make an estimate based on, you know, the actual size of the American Legion?

Surfing in to their homepage we discover the Legion consists of nearly 15000 posts and “numbers nearly three million members.” Okay. So, three million members, certainly not all of whom thought Calley should receive beatification, but many. And then, of course, many other extremely conservative people who are not veterans but might nevertheless hold similar views.

So yeah, I’d say a large portion of US society, many of whom also occupy positions of considerable status due to their service to the country, thought a mass murderer should be canonized. But then, following your logic, you know doubt also feel that you and your culture are superior to them, as well.

By the way, the My Lai Massacre took place in 1968. A little over 340 Vietnamese civilians were shot in cold blood. Only Calley was convicted of wrongdoing; for his crimes, he spent a grand total of 4 1/2 months in jail.

Does that make you feel superior?

Can you please provide me with some sort of evidence regarding the attitudes of the average Yazidi before you make such a blanket condemnation of their culture, and assert the superiority of your own?

True enough.

But in making such a judgment I fall back on my own values, which are naturally, to a very great extent, determined by my own culture; so asserting the superiority of my culture becomes a self-fulfilling vicious circle. And superiority is not some objectively existing thing, like a rock, that absolutely exists regardless of my opinion; it is an assessment that takes in many factors, an assessment that I seriously doubt can ever be objectively made.

132

[QUOTE=elucidator]
Are we not the people who set fire to Tokyo, with the deliberate design of roasting as many civilians as possible? Was there a hue and cry from the people, denunciations from our pulpits? As Curtis LeMay noted, if we lost that war everyone who signed off on that would have been tried for war crimes. We knew what we were doing, we did it anyway.

Perhaps there is some subtlety of horror between stoning and roasting, but if there is, it escapes me.
[/QUOTE]

Quibbles/Clarifications: “We” did not set fire to Tokyo. You and I and the others posting here did not do this.
And, had we been alive back then, we would not have been polled by the military or the dept. of defense as to our wishes in regard to Tokyo. When do we ever get to approve such things?

I daresay it’s a different situation in the community where the girl was stoned to death. They did indeed decide, directly or indirectly, as a group and a culture, to kill this individual.

133

[QUOTE=Terrifel]
“Society” is made of individuals.
[/QUOTE]

But an individual is not society.

134

[QUOTE=Ensign Edison]
And then you can comfortably go back to playing down the less important “flaws” in your own culture that leave millions of people physically and sexually abused as children and adults, that results in the rape and murder of little girls and their entire families during wartime, that fails to care for its sick unless a profit can be made off it, that is built on the bones of the American Indian genocide and the slave trade…but hey, at least we haven’t ganged up and publicly executed anyone in like decades! Mostly!
[/QUOTE]

Yes. These things do happen in our society, but they are not condoned are they? Nor supported by laws, either secular or religious, nor supported by the general populace. In fact, we have entire governmental agencies established for dealing with the people to whom this horrible shit happens. You and I and 299.5 Million Americans are on the same side of the Medical-Industrial complex. We want to get better, THEY want to get money. OTOH, WE hold them to nearly impossible standards, and sue their socks off if they make so much as the tiniest gaffe.

Every single society is built on the bones of the losers my friend. EVERY ONE.
History is written by the winners. What matters, what TRULY matters, and especially in this case, is that we LEARN that what we DID to get where we are is the WRONG thing, and, the ironic thread though ALL of these things you mention is religion, which begs the question why there is enough religion to incite violence, but not enough to instill tolerance?

And friend, if it were 10 years, or a hundred since a mob of maniacs publicly executed someone, were that to happen today, those we can catch WILL be punished. Consider the lesson learned.

135

[QUOTE=Mr. Svinlesha]
buttonjockey:Hey, if you’re going to insult me, you’ll have to try a damn sight harder than that!

:slight_smile:

No apology necessary.This is a strange method for estimating the size of the American Legion. May I suggest that instead of measuring the American Legion on the basis of a single court case, we make an estimate based on, you know, the actual size of the American Legion? Surfing in to their homepage we discover the Legion consists of nearly 15000 posts and “numbers nearly three million members.”
[/QUOTE]

I would wonder about their actual membership count to be honest. I’m cynical, their own site quotes:

[QUOTE=American Legion]
If you are on active duty today, anywhere in the world, or have served during any eligible war eras, you are a veteran and you’re eligible to become a Legionnaire!
[/QUOTE]

3 Million members of what status? Joined and were never active? Are they counting active duty personnel as de facto members? Imagine if 3 million people were active toward one particular cause how loud that voice would be. I doubt openly their numbers, but let’s just say they’re accurate. Let’s assume for the sake of argument that all 3 Million people were alive, active and believed this war criminal should be set free. That would add up to, in an oddly precise way, 1% of the US population. One percent. That’s it. Whoop-de-fuck.

[QUOTE=Mr. S]
Okay. So, three million members, certainly not all of whom thought Calley should receive beatification, but many. And then, of course, many other extremely conservative people who are not veterans but might nevertheless hold similar views.
[/QUOTE]

I don’t think anyone but that one loudmouth would truly believe him worthy of sainthood. It’s a figure of speech.

[QUOTE=Mr. S]
So yeah, I’d say a large portion of US society, many of whom also occupy positions of considerable status due to their service to the country, thought a mass murderer should be canonized. But then, following your logic, you know doubt also feel that you and your culture are superior to them, as well.
[/QUOTE]

Again, I don’t think anyone with any “status” (which is an ironic statement to make, considering the post-war military population, who are generally mistreated and whose benefits suck. Hard) thinks that Calley ought to be made a saint. Further, I do not believe that you believe that. I’m not your typically religious person, but I know that some douchebag war criminal and Mother Theresa ain’t on the same level, and I don’t know too many sane people who would think they are, and MT ain’t a saint yet. So go easy on the rhetoric.

[QUOTE=Mr. S]
By the way, the My Lai Massacre took place in 1968. A little over 340 Vietnamese civilians were shot in cold blood. Only Calley was convicted of wrongdoing; for his crimes, he spent a grand total of 4 1/2 months in jail.

Does that make you feel superior?
[/QUOTE]

No. It makes me sick. Still, you (and many others in this thread) are weighing red apples and green ones. Vietnam was a country at war (yeah, yeah, I know, so is Iraq) and these were soldiers committing these WAR crimes. Not civilians committing public murder.

Those two things, like it or not, are held to a different standard.

Acts and crimes of war are far more serious and far more reprehensible, and illustrates the point that in horrible enough circumstances, that a human can and will do anything (as was previously stated).

That said though, if all of the offenders could have been named, caught and tried, that’s what I would expect of my culture, of my society.

I do not expect, nor do my fellow citizens expect that those that commit crimes during war like murder (and no, shooting to defend is not murder, but there is never a time where crimes like rape=tactical necessity) of innocent women and children in cold blood will be tried, convicted and punished.

[QUOTE=Mr. S]
But in making such a judgment I fall back on my own values, which are naturally, to a very great extent, determined by my own culture; so asserting the superiority of my culture becomes a self-fulfilling vicious circle. And superiority is not some objectively existing thing, like a rock, that absolutely exists regardless of my opinion; it is an assessment that takes in many factors, an assessment that I seriously doubt can ever be objectively made.
[/QUOTE]

There are laws, rules, things like the rock you mentioned, in nature, in modern society that are true without wavering. It is absolutely, positively, ALWAYS, not-to-be-confused-with-never, WRONG to STONE A FEMALE TO DEATH FOR LOVING SOMEONE OF A DIFFERENT RELIGION. We don’t DO that here. We don’t accept that being DONE here. We do not condone or look the other way as it’s happening. And we’re better for it.

136

However, the reason we sometimes can’t catch them (and sometimes don’t even try) is because they have support from communities who endorse their actions.

Yes, we have laws against mob violence, vigilanteism, honor killing, and that sort of thing. But then, so does Kurdistan. The trouble is not that the society doesn’t officially condemn such crimes, but that there’s enough unofficial support for such crimes that some people feel emboldened to commit them.

One example in American society might be assaults on illegal immigrants by vigilante “militias”. Yes, the unofficial support for honor killings in Kurdish society is much stronger than the unofficial support for, say, violence against illegal immigrants in our society. But that’s a difference of degree rather than kind. It’s not a simple black-and-white situation where our society has solved the problem (or “learned the lesson”) and theirs hasn’t.

However, well within living memory in many of our communities, it was not considered wrong (much less WRONG) to lynch someone for loving someone of a different race. And in many cases the lynchers were never convicted or even tried.

Was Mississippi in 1955, say, not part of “modern society”? If not, when did “modern society” begin? And is “modern society” equally committed to the conviction that it is WRONG to kill somebody just for illegally crossing a border? If so, we’d have to admit that there are groups in the American Southwest that are not part of “modern society”.

Yes, on the whole our society at the current time does have a strong commitment to human rights, and that’s certainly a good thing. But I think a close examination of our society in detail would reveal that this commitment is actually considerably less “absolutely, positively, ALWAYS” “true without wavering” than we would wish to believe.

137

Having read through this thread, I believe the discussion is lacking a full understanding of the term ‘culture’. Sometimes called ‘subcultures’, cultures can be anything from a family, a local community, a religious group, a group within a religious group, a country etc. Once you understand this, it is much easier to condemn a ‘culture’ as being violent or inferior. In the case of Nazi Germany, ofcourse not all people agreed with extermination of Jews, it was a culture within Germany that did.
Also, whilst the outcome for an individual is probably the same, I think there is a difference between legally or religiously sanctioned acts of violence and culturally accepted acts of violence. One is formal and the other informal.

138

[QUOTE=Fat Chance]
How many times do we have to explain the difference?
[/QUOTE]

Looks like twice, by my count. :stuck_out_tongue:

So 2 is not “several” is your argument? You’re sure no homophobic attack ever involved 3 attackers?

Or community and police? I present to you the Stonewall riots. That’s not just an incident, that’s probably the foundational moment of the modern gay rights movement.

Neither does “their” culture as a whole. Subcultures within their culture do…as have subcultures within ours.

Well, it’s a matter of established, incontrovertible fact that prominent, influential members of our society have spoken of gays as deserving death. It’s a matter of fact that the “deranged” men who killed Shepard were aware of anti-gay bias in said society. It’s speculation on your part to say they could not have been motivated by said social pressures. It would be speculation on my part to claim that they were so motivated, true; but it’s hardly speculation to observe that we have as a society treated gays with a heavy hand based on religion and tradition, including ostracizing them, ruining their social staus, and occasional beatings and killings. Are you purporting to say that all those beatings and killings were totally unrelated to the deep, unrelenting social hostility to gay behavior? At what point does a pattern become more than random?

Sailboat

139

We’re off to Denmark in about 10 minutes, so, a very quick rebuttal:

bj:

This is a very nice rhetorical tact; it seems as if nothing short of a public stoning in America will count as being the equivalent of a public stoning in Iraq. Given that, you’ve assured yourself most comfortably of your own superiority, and for that I congratulate you.

My point is this: even if My Lai was a war crime, we still see that we have a large portion of the US civilian population that seem to want support – even canonize – its perpetrator. You’ve judged all Yazidi culture because, according to you, it supported the stoning of this young woman. While it’s true that the crimes themselves are not precisely equivalent, in both cases large portions of the society in question seem to have evaluated them in a positive light. In fact, you originally cited the fact that Calley was sitting in jail as evidence of our society approbation of him; yet he sat a mere 4 months for his part in the massacre, and no one else who participated was punished in the slightest.

Gotta run.

140

Your google-fu is the equivalent of your Scandy cuisine, Lapp-dancer!

Now drop and give me 300!