| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
 Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 7:57 pm Post subject: Gender equality trumps culture: Canadian judge |
 |
|
| Quote: |
True story: man kills wife, stabbing her in the neck 19 times with a steak knife, is convicted of first-degree murder and appeals on basis that she was unfaithful and, as a devout Muslim, he was protecting family honour.
Nice try, and maybe elsewhere in the world Adi Abdul Humaid might have been acquitted. But the United Arab Emirates citizen made the mistake of murdering Aysar Abbas in Ottawa in 1999 and, ultimately, the Ontario Court of Appeal rejected his appeal.
Superior Court Justice J.A. Doherty said that had Humaid killed his wife for religious beliefs, that alone would have been "a motive for murder." But it was a moot point because Doherty didn't buy Humaid's new religious devotion and, in his 2006 ruling, concluded the story lacked credibility.
Nevertheless, the judge was concerned enough about the nature of the defence argument to write: "The alleged beliefs are premised on the notion that women are inferior to men and that violence against women is in some circumstances accepted, if not encouraged. These beliefs are antithetical to fundamental Canadian values, including gender equality."
So there you have it. Fundamental Canadian values. They exist. Although the case didn't set a charter precedent � say, gender rights over religious rights � the judge couldn't have been clearer in signalling his position. Some lawyers interpreted his comments as a warning about trying to use religious freedom to justify murder.
|
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/218355 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
| Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And that is all it takes. A firm "No". "You can't do that here".
We now have 1 fundamental Canadian value that we won't sell out in the name of multicult. I'd like this judge to establish some more.
A very welcome step in the right direction. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alyallen
Joined: 29 Mar 2004
Location: The 4th Greatest Place on Earth = Jeonju!!!
|
| Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A real victory for gender equality. Too bad it took someone's death to get it 
Hopefully it's a step in the right direction. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nicco61
Joined: 06 May 2007
Location: North Carolina, USA
|
| Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 8:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't think gender equality had anything to do with it. Laws are laws and should be followed by everyone. There should not be laws that infringe on another persons rights and the right to live trumps all other rights, religious etc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
freethought
Joined: 13 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't view this as a matter of gender equality either, but rather a much needed limit on religious rights/freedoms. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 3:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Nicco61 wrote: |
| I don't think gender equality had anything to do with it. Laws are laws and should be followed by everyone. There should not be laws that infringe on another persons rights and the right to live trumps all other rights, religious etc. |
I agree with that. This is simply about murder. You commit a murder, you go to jail unless you killed in self-defense. There couldn't have been a ruling in any other way. I know the old days some people in the U.S. and France used to not get heavy sentences if they killed their spouse after finding them in bed with someone. I believe they called them crimes of passion. Or am I wrong about that? Thank God we don't have judges these days who would excuse murder of females for reasons of passion, "honour" or some other dumb reason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cosmicgirlie
Joined: 29 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 5:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
I agree with that. This is simply about murder. You commit a murder, you go to jail unless you killed in self-defense. There couldn't have been a ruling in any other way. I know the old days some people in the U.S. and France used to not get heavy sentences if they killed their spouse after finding them in bed with someone. I believe they called them crimes of passion. Or am I wrong about that? Thank God we don't have judges these days who would excuse murder of females for reasons of passion, "honour" or some other dumb reason. |
My understanding of the law about "crimes of passion" is that it is considered second degree murder. There isn't an premeditation about it, it 'just happened' so they would get a lesser sentence. I could be wrong and I"d have to verify with my best friend the lawyer, but from what I remember from Law class in high school if you committ a murder in Canada during a 'heated' moment then it is classified as second degree murder.
On the OP, I also don't think this is a case of gender equality. It does have a feel of gender equality to it in the sense that it's a man killing his wife in the name of Allah but this case is more about religious freedom vs right to life which in this incident the right to life is much more valuable then your right to practice religion. I like that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
| Nicco61 wrote: |
| I don't think gender equality had anything to do with it. Laws are laws and should be followed by everyone. There should not be laws that infringe on another persons rights and the right to live trumps all other rights, religious etc. |
I agree with that. This is simply about murder. You commit a murder, you go to jail unless you killed in self-defense. There couldn't have been a ruling in any other way. I know the old days some people in the U.S. and France used to not get heavy sentences if they killed their spouse after finding them in bed with someone. I believe they called them crimes of passion. Or am I wrong about that? Thank God we don't have judges these days who would excuse murder of females for reasons of passion, "honour" or some other dumb reason. |
]
And a Muslim once told me that in reality his religion only allows him kill someone if he or his family in self-defense against a direct threat, as in when burglars enter his home. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
