Cut Expenditures: Slap your wife.



Get the Abu Gharib reference?


A Saudi judge justifies a man slapping a spendthrift wife. Click on this link to read this off-the-record pearl of wisdom.

I needn’t really say anything.  Any right thinking person will be as revolted as I was. The inevitable argument will of course be that it is the “culture”  and “poverty”that is to blame. No. Saudi Arabia is one of the weathiest countries in the world. Their barbaric seventh century views prevail beacuse the religious authorities there guard them jealously. They keep the people in the dark, enforce out-dated, unjust, barbarous and discriminatory laws with the single-minded goal of holding on to their power which has no rational basis if put to the critical test. There is no greater evidence of this than incidents like the above, when jugdes, who are supposed to be the guardians of justice spew such excrementious opinions. The judge said that both parties are equally responsible for domestic violence: this in a country where the husband has complete power over his wife, where women are not allowed to drive and until recently couldn’t sit in the front seat of a car. What he really means is that if a husband beats his wife, it is of course her fault: she should not have made him angry in the first place.

This time (not the first and the last) it happened in Islam, but applies equally well to all religions. Those who claim that religion is not to blame for incidents such as this take heed: if there were no religion, those who advocate and enforce such barbarities would have no power. It is religion that gives them that power-and this is especially true of Islam which, barring a few exceptions, regulates most walks of life, some of them very personal, in the countries it dominates.  

In India, personal laws are still governed by religion. Which means that religious laws govern some of our most personal activities. Now for those who wish this law to apply to them, it’s their business.

Put me off my breakfast.

Did you know that girls in Saudi Arabia have the right to education?



Filed under Uncategorized

5 responses to “Cut Expenditures: Slap your wife.

  1. You will find many more such incidents happening in the muslim world if you visit or

    if there were no religion, those who advocate and enforce such barbarities would have no power. It is religion that gives them that power

    I had a debate recently where I pointed out exactly this. In most cases, religion is the excuse people give when they don’t have any other excuses to give.

    They keep happening, i know. and not just in the muslim world i posted about this one because it ruins my morining when i read something like this in the papers

  2. Hi The Couch Clown (TCC–hope you don’t mind the acronym)!

    Though, I believe religion defends/justifies certain ill practices (say the practice of killing bride for dowry or that of sati), it’s the evil inherent in one committing those immoral deeds that allows them to cross that (nonexistent) threshold of guilt. A deeply religious but conscientious and compassionate person is unlikely
    to kill their daughter in law or indulge in female feticide. It’s just that religious people use religion to defend their actions. My only point, those indulging in immorality would anyway do so, but religion (especially when open to ‘interpretation’, and hence, manipulation) prevents them from feeling guilty about it.

    I’ve done a post on issue similar to this called ‘A few responses to criticism of atheism’ on my blogspot blog.

    Take care

    “My only point, those indulging in immorality would anyway do so, but religion (especially when open to ‘interpretation’, and hence, manipulation) prevents them from feeling guilty about it.”

    But the tragedy is that this is not always the case! Yes, religion can be used as a defence for atrocities. But the problem is that religion is also capable of making good people do bad things. Consider, for example, the fellow in the US (his name escapes me at the moment) who murdered some doctors who performed abortions. Now he is moral in that he disapproves of killing children (as would you or I). But it is his religion that has convinced him that abortion equals child-killing, which he would not have believed had he been a rational thinker. Therefore, even if he is sympathetic to the death of children (a good quality) his religion has led him to take the lives of innocent doctors who are not, in fact, guilty of that act! Or consider the eight year old children in terrorist camps who are hell bent on killing people. It is not that the children are inherently evil but their religion has made them so.

    The best example of this is given by Richard Dawkins when, in The God Delusion, he tells us of a survey conducted in Israel. A classroom of seven or eight year olds was given a passage from the old testament where Joshua enters the city of Jericho and he and his army slay all the men, women, children and animals in the city. In other words, Joshua commits genocide. The question was “Do you think Joshua acted well?” The children were given a series of choices ranging from total approval to total disapproval. Most of the children approved! And even those who disapproved did so for entirely non compassionte reasons: “They should have kept the animals for themselves,” writes one tiny tot. How does this prove my point? This is how: the conductor of the survey ran a control group in the experiment, there was another group of children who were given the same passage, but the Biblical references were removed, the character was one ‘General Lin’ and the setting was “a Chinese kingdom 3000 years ago”. And guess what? Almost all of them disapproved on entirely compassionate grounds- supplying the reason that it was wrong to kill innocent people. So it is the religious factor that turned a class of eight year olds from critics of genocide into its advocates! The children could not have ben indoctrinated in favour of genocide independently of religion: since as we see, they have shown dispproval of genocide in general. But they have been taught not to question religion, so to them anything with a religious connatation is by default good. Religion thus not only serves passively as a defence for atrocities, but actively serves as an instigator for good people to commit these atrocities by removing the moral inhibition against those acts. Thus, to use your own terminology, it not only serves as defence for the “immoral” types, but in fact turns the “moral” thinkers into immoral ones.

    The Couch Clown

    • TCC,

      In case of the man who murdered doctors, he must have not held any kind of compassion for human life, otherwise to think of it, most people would experience some kind of hesitation even in beating up a dog. One would have to summon a lot of cruelty to kill another man. If that American man could kill visible grown up adults, it’s unlikely that he actually held any compassion for invisible embryos and fetuses. To him the act (of aborting) was wrong only because his religous scriptures as interpreted by religious authorities said so.

      Regarding children being trained as terrorists: they are never allowed to develop normal compassion and rational thinking. Though, the organizations that train them are affiliated to religion, same could’ve been the result of a chauvinistic cult.

      For the last study you pointed out, I’d say that those children who approved of violence, might have not actually killed people themselves as their revulsion against blood and gore would come in way.

      But the way my reply’s turning out, I’m trying to distinguish between belief in existence of God resulting in violence as against violence resulting from allowing one’s morals to be hijacked by some authority, which is seeming a redundant exercise as for practical purpose, it could be conceded that most often religious scriptures and leaders are the ones to whom most irrational people accede their moral logic.

      Take care.

  3. Pingback: How tempting and how impossible! « The Life and Times of an Indian Homemaker

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s