Şaria în Bangladeş şi New Jersey

Mahomed a spus: “Dacă soţul îşi cheamă soţia în patul lui [pentru relaţii sexuale] iar ea refuză şi îl face să doarmă înfuriat, îngerii o vor blestema pîna dimineaţa. (Bukhari 4.54.460).

Şaria interzisă în Bangladeş, dar aplicată în New Jersey!
Musulmanii au mai multe drepturi în New Jersey, decât în Bangladeş. La concluzia asta ajungi când compari hotărarile luate de Curtea Supremă din Bangladeş şi un tribunal din New Jersey. În primul caz, o avocată a obţinut de curând o hotărâre a Curţii Supreme care prevede că deciziile fondate pe şaria sunt contrare drepturilor care prevăd egalitatea femeilor, garantate în constitutia ţării şi în convenţiile interniţionale. În al doilea caz este vorba de hotărarea unui tribunal din New Jersey care a aplicat şaria intr-un proces de agresiune sexuala. O femeie a cerut protecţia judiciară contra soţului său,care a batut-o, a violat-o şi a torturat-o timp de mai multe ore. Judecătorul a decis că soţul (musulman) nu a comis nici un delict deoarece in interpretarea sa, bărbatul respecta şaria, şi a-l pedepsi inseamnă să-i încalci drepturile religioase!!.
Acest caz revoltător a fost evocat si de Newt Gingrich în discursul tinut de acesta pe 29 iulie. Vorbind despre drepturile femeilor sau ale homosexualilor în ţările musulmane el îşi exprimă surprinderea că ”stânga nu intelege că şaria ameninţă direct şi mortal chiar valorile Stângii “. Inchei tot cu un pasaj din excelentul discurs tinut de Newt Gingrich : ” Şaria se afla într-o contradicţie fundamentală , cu tradiţia occidentală, care-şi are rădăcinile la Atena, Roma şi Ierusalim“.

Newt Gingrich: Interziceţi şaria – este “complet opusă valorilor lumii occidentale”

costin: hotărîrea judecătorului din New Jersey a fost anulată. De data asta.

13 comentarii la “Şaria în Bangladeş şi New Jersey”

Citeşte sau adaugă un comentariu...

  1. Oy vey, Obama

    Is President Obama good for the Jews? For more and more Jewish-Americans, the answer is no.

    In a Pew Research Center report issued on Thursday and entitled “Growing Number of Americans Say Obama Is a Muslim” (tragic in its own right), there was another bit of bad news for Obama: the number of Jews who identify as Republican or as independents who lean Republican has increased by more than half since the year he was elected. At 33 percent it now stands at the highest level since the data have been kept. In 2008, the ratio of Democratic Jews to Republican Jews was far more than three to one. Now it’s less than two to one.

    This is no doubt a reaction, at least in part, to the Obama administration having taken a hard rhetorical stance with Israel, while taking “special time and care on our relationship with the Muslim world,” as Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, put it in June. If that sounds like courtship, it is.

    (It should be noted that the Pew poll was taken before Obama’s bold support for the right of Muslims to build a community center and mosque a few blocks north of ground zero.)

    Some of the president’s most ardent critics and some of Israel’s staunchest American defenders — two groups that are by no means mutually exclusive — have seized on what they see as the administration’s unfair and unbalanced treatment of Israel and have taken their denunciations to the extremes.

    In September 2009, Obama went before the United Nations and declared, “America does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.” It was a line that the president had used a few months earlier in a speech in Cairo, but this time it threw critics into a tizzy. John Bolton, an ambassador to the United Nations during George W. Bush’s administration, responded: “This is the most radical anti-Israel speech I can recall any president making.”

    In March, while Vice President Joe Biden was visiting, Israel announced it would move ahead with plans to build housing in East Jerusalem. The administration was not amused. Biden condemned the decision as undermining “the trust that we need right now” in order to have profitable negotiations.

    In other words, “You announce this now? You can’t be serious!”

    In April, after President Obama urged Israel to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, Representative Eric Cantor, the House minority whip and the lone Jewish Republican in the chamber, lashed out: “The administration’s troubling policy of manufacturing fights with Israel to ingratiate itself with some in the Arab world is no way to advance the cause of Mideast peace.”

    And, the Gaza flotilla incident in May that left nine people dead and drew international condemnation of Israeli tactics only added to the tensions.

    The White House, feeling pressure over the developing rift, sought to mend fences in May through a series of meetings and statements, but as Helene Cooper reported in The Times, “It remains unclear whether Mr. Obama’s latest outreach will reassure American Jews and the general public in Israel, where Mr. Obama’s approval ratings have plummeted.” And, it’s still foggy.

    When the president met in July at the White House with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he stressed the United States’ unwavering support for Israel and his commitment to the “special bond” between the two nations.

    Still that was not enough to quell the cries of those like Representative Mike Pence, the Republican Conference chairman who earlier this month told the Christian Broadcasting Network, “I believe the Obama administration is the most anti-Israel administration in the modern history of the state of Israel and our relationship with her.” The more extreme the statement the better I guess.

    Fair or not, these criticisms are crystallizing into a shared belief among many: Obama is burning bridges with the Jewish community in order to build bridges to the Muslim world.

    There is very little independent polling, aside from Pew’s party identification polling, to help us understand how American Jews see the president, his stance toward Israel and the political implications. So in that vacuum, pollsters with partisan leanings have been spinning their findings like dreidels.

    In April, the Republican polling firm McLaughlin & Associates released a survey that they said showed that only 42 percent of American Jews would vote to re-elect President Obama. He captured 78 percent of the Jewish vote in 2008.

    Recently, the democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg and the Israel Project, a nonprofit in Washington, conducted a poll that they said found American support of Israel was dropping like a rock.

    Wherever the truth lies, it is fair to say that it doesn’t bode well for Obama. While Jews are only 2 percent of the United States population, their influence outweighs their proportion. Furthermore, in crucial battleground states like Florida, their vote is critical. Obama won Florida by 3 percentage points in 2008. Jews represented 4 percent of the overall vote in that state.

    As Ed Koch, the former mayor of New York City, told Fox News in April, “I have been a supporter of President Obama and went to Florida for him, urged Jews all over the country to vote for him, saying that he would be just as good as John McCain on the security of Israel. I don’t think it’s true anymore.”

    The president now has another, more visible chance to reverse this perception. On Friday, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton announced that Israel and the Palestinians would resume peace talks in Washington early next month. The administration has to decide how heavy its hand will be in guiding these discussions and what its tone will be with the two parties — who gets the tough love and who gets the free love.

  2. 2ateu

    E amuzant cum “conservatorii” si extremistii cre(s)tini devin mari aparatori ai drepturilor femeilor, homosexualilor etc atunci cand e vorba despre Islam. Dar, ce-i drept, nu te poti astepta de la un cre(s)tin habotnic sa aiba simtul ridicolului.

    Astept si alte materiale feministe si pro-homosexualitate pe acest blog :)

  3. ateica, m-am gindit putin daca sa iti las comentariu sau sa il sterg, dar sa zicem ca nu ai intrecut limita (la limita) si ma pot amuza putin cu tine.

    astea fiind spuse, comentariul tau este instructiv pentru ca e revoltator de banal in conformism lui corect politic care domina occidentul, idei care au intrat deja in moda si la noi: crestinii = talibanii (xenofobia si rasismul lor fiind si singurul motiv pentru care au rica pe musulmani), motiv pentru care nici nu merita discutat subiectul articolului – apropo, ai vazut despre ce e vb? in rest, conformismul cel mai plictisitor, clisee pe care le folosesti pentru ca da bine(crestin habotnic) si cite ceva despre un simt al ridicolului, care iti lipseste alaturi o cit de vaga idee despre lumea in care traiesti.
    eu zic sa te lasi de Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, Dawkins si toti cool-onii.. chiar daca spun ei ca anumite idei te fac automat inteligent, nu este asta. tu esti dovada vie :P

  4. 4calehari

    Ateu,foloseste cuvinte ca : amuzant ,simtul ridicolului,atunci cand se refera la cazul unei femei ce a fost batuta, violata si torturata o perioada lunga de timp.Interesanta reactie ! Oricare PROFILER FBI s-ar bucura sa-l aiba ca ” material ” de studiu. Cine stie,poate ca Ateu , le va oferi prilejul.

  5. 5euNuke

    ceea ce nu a reuşit să afle ateul-musafir este aspectul fundamental pe care extremiştii conservatori îl susţin şi anume că dreptul la viaţă nu poate fi condiţionat sau restricţionat prin apartenenţa la o minoritate, artificială sau cvasi-instituţionalizată, el aparţine deopotrivă femeilor, homosexualilor, ateilor şi, desigur, musulmanilor. aici nu se apără sau discută drepturile unei minorităţi in dauna implacabilă a altora ci, dimpotrivă, se apără însăşi temelia sistemului de drept occidental, de pildă principiul egalităţii in faţa legii a cetăţenilor care obligă autorităţile statului să aplice aceeaşi normă, in acelaşi mod, printr-o procedură unică pentru litigii similare indiferent de religia, opiniile politice, sexul sau orientarea sexuală a părţilor incidente, principiul pe de o parte contestat de islam ce pretinde că musulmanii se situează sub jurisdicţia universalistă a şariei, şi, pe de alta, lovit cotidian de bila toleranţei de plumb manevrată de corifeii multiculturalismului, de altfel demolarea fiind singura manifestare culturală a acestor cercopiteci grupaţi intr-o nomenklatură de tip socialist, aşa îşi exprimă aceşti indivizi valenţele artistice, atacînd şi năruind tot ceea ce ţine de civilizaţia autohtonă, incapabili fiind să mai producă ceva care să se ridice măcar pîn la genunchiul străbunilor lor. şi este atît de uşor, dragă ateule, să contribui la hărmălaia distructivă moşmondind tot soiul de baliverne ce menţionează cu emfază drepturile omului asta in timp ce birocraţiile europei nu contenesc cu încalcarea şi reambalarea convenabilă a celor 2 drepturi fundamentale şi a libertăţilor ce decurg din ele…dreptul la viaţă şi proprietatea individuală, la care aş adăuga in lumina celor recent întîmplate in Franţa şi libertatea de mişcare, drastic atenuată in mod paradoxal pentru o etnie europeană şi nu pentru acei iliciţi imigranţi asiatici. n-ai decît să te alături corului european de multiculturalişti progresişti ce se pretind deţinătorii sfîntului potir cu agheasmă integratoare şi eliberatoare…că, deh, orice opinent care pretinde că drepturile astea sînt universale şi că nu pot fi restrînse, diminuate, prefabricate pentru a fi pe placul unei minorităţi e musai să fie un fundamentalist creştin sau conservator.

  6. 6vlad

    “conservatorii” si extremistii cre(s)tini devin mari aparatori ai drepturilor femeilor, homosexualilor etc atunci cand e vorba despre Islam

    conservatorii și creștinii (da, cei fundamentaliști/habotnici și mai cum dorești tu – pentru că nu poți fi decât total de partea adevărului, sau deloc, indiferent de domeniu) nu sunt de-acord cu homosexualitatea, dar de aici nu rezultă că doresc uciderea homosexualilor, ca în Islam. nu e greu de priceput, dacă începi să gândești cu capul propriu și renunți la fundamentalismul ateist (adică la adevărul vostru drag)

  7. 7toro

    Off-topic: Sorry ca incerc sa hijack-ui topicul, dar tocmai am citit un articol interesant.
    http://tkcollier.wordpress.com.....worldwide/

    Iran is experiencing what may be one of the most dramatic demographic shifts in human history. Thirty years ago, after the shah had been driven into exile and the Islamic Republic was being established, the fertility rate was 6.5. By the turn of the century, it had dropped to 2.2. Today, at 1.7, it has collapsed to European levels.

    Ce parere aveti? Ash vrea sa pot spune ca am incredere in articol, dar nu stiu cum pot verifica.

  8. 8ramanujan

    #2 (ateu)
    Fara sa generalizam, in lumea neo-protestanta americana exista mult fundamentalism, multa habotnicie, multa prostie, oameni cu idei bizare si in general oameni batuti in cap. Plus atitudine agresiva la adresa altor religii sau chiar impotriva crestinilor de alte confesiuni.

    Uitati doi comici vestiti ai micului ecran, raposatul Jerry Falwell si Pat Robertson la data de 13 septembrie 2001 (la 2 zile dupa 9/11):

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-CAcdta_8I

    I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America. I point the finger in their face and say ‘you helped this happen’.

    (Jerry Falwell)

    Deci păgânii (!), feministele, lesbienele si cei care vor secularizarea Americiii sunt responsabili (partial) pt. 9/11. (Pt. ca l-au suparat pe Dumnezeu, probabil.)

    Tot Pat Roberson, dupa cutremurul din Haiti, a afirmat ca acesta a fost cauzat de un pact cu Diavolul pe care haitienii l-au facut in urma cu 200 de ani pt. a scapa de ocupatia franceza.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZtfxri8NyU

  9. toro, foarte interesant articolul. pe linga scaderea natalitatii in tarile musulmane auzisem ceva si despre o recuperare in europa occidentala, asta mi se pare si mai interesant:

    The falling fertility rates in large segments of the Islamic world have been matched by another significant shift: Across northern and western Europe, women have suddenly started having more babies. Germany’s minister for the family, Ursula von der Leyen, announced in February that the country had recorded its second straight year of increased births. Sweden’s fertility rate jumped eight percent in 2004 and stayed put. Both Britain and France now project that their populations will rise from the current 60 million each to more than 75 million by mid century.

    Apoi asteptam sa citesc asta:

    Immigrant mothers account for part of the fertility increase throughout Europe, but only part. And, significantly, many of the immigrants are arrivals from elsewhere in Europe, especially the eastern European countries admitted to the European Union in recent years. Children born to eastern European immigrants accounted for a third of Scotland’s “mini baby boom,” for ­example.

    Cresterea natalitatii este cauzata partial de imigranti, dar proportia cred ca este destul de considerabila, asta cel putin o perioada, pina natalitatea imigrantilor se va adapta la “obiceiurile locale”. Pina atunci, cam asta e situatia.. UK: Avort şi sterilizare pentru salvarea planetei

    Si totusi..

    In France, the fertility rate has risen from 1.7 in 1993 to 2.1 in 2007, its highest level since before 1980, despite a steady fall in birthrates among women not born in France. France’s National Institute of Demographic Studies reports that the immigrant population is responsible for only five percent of the rise in the ­birthrate.

    Acestea sint genul de statistici in care nu prea am incedere. A devenit obicei ca impactul imigratiei in tarile occidentale sa fie raportat mult micsorat de guverne. Dar m-as bucura sa fie asa. Asta va face viitorul si mai imprevizibil si interesant. iti amintesti banuiesc cutia cu ciocolata din forest gump… you never know what you gonna get.

    Pe de alta parte, se pare ca viitorul rezerva Statelor Unite multi alti Obama:

    the population of the United States will rise from today’s total of some 300 million to 438 million in 2050. Eighty- two percent of that increase will be produced by new immigrants and their U.S.-born descendants.

    Pe de alta parte, nu pot sa nu vad cenzura corectitudinii politice care da vina pentru masacrele islamiste din darfur si rwanda pe foamete, nu pe jihad:

    the lesson from Darfur and the Rwanda genocide is that disaster can follow when population growth strains local environments so badly that people cannot feed themselves.

    interesant articolul dar absurd de incomplet. nimic despre iminenta (cel mai probabil sub 10 ani) deteriorare a situatiei in europa occidentala.. razboiul civil dintre europeni si musulmani. libanizarea occidentului. (asta apropo de credibilitatea articolului.. cifrele cred ca sint in mare corecte, dar previziunile mai putin)

  10. “YOU MAY BE A TALIBAN IF…” :lol:

    1.. You refine heroin for a living, but you have a moral objection to liquor.

    2. You own a $3,000 machine gun and $5,000 rocket launcher, but you can’t afford shoes.

    3. You have more wives than teeth.

    4. You wipe your butt with your bare hand, but consider bacon “unclean.”

    5. You think vests come in two styles: bullet-proof and suicide.

    6. You can’t think of anyone you haven’t declared Jihad against.

    7. You consider television dangerous, but routinely carry explosives in your clothing.

    8. You were amazed to discover that cell phones have uses other than setting off roadside bombs.

    9. You have nothing against women and think every man should own at least four.

    10. You’ve always had a crush on your neighbor’s goat.

  11. 11toro

    Tocmai am vazut un film fucked-up pe GoV:
    http://bankoran.com/?p=124

    50% din casatoriile in randul pakistanezilor din UK sunt intre verishori. 75% din copiii cu disabititati genetice sunt de origine pakistaneza. O etnie la care shi tiganii le dau clasa, dar tiganii sunt crestini (cat de cat).

Comentează

*

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.