Western Resistance

« Nigeria: Muslim Pupils Kill Their Christian Teacher | | Islamists And Bio-Chemical Terror: Part Three »

March 22, 2007

Germany: Judge Cites Koran to Minimize Marital Abuse

This story, with thanks to Dhimmi Watch, seems hard to understand: A German Judge Cites Koran in Divorce Case

The case seems simply too strange to be true. A 26-year-old mother of two wanted to free herself from what had become a miserable and abusive marriage. The police had even been called to their apartment to separate the two -- both of Moroccan origin -- after her husband got violent in May 2006. The husband was forced to move out, but the terror continued: Even after they separated, the spurned husband threatened to kill his wife.

A quick divorce seemed to be the only solution -- the 26-year-old was unwilling to wait the year between separation and divorce mandated by German law. She hoped that as soon as they were no longer married, her husband would leave her alone. Her lawyer, Barbara Becker-Rojczyk agreed and she filed for immediate divorce with a Frankfurt court last October. They both felt that the domestic violence and death threats easily fulfilled the "hardship" criteria necessary for such an accelerated split.

In January, though, a letter arrived from the judge adjudicating the case. The judge rejected the application for a speedy divorce by referring to a passage in the Koran that some have controversially interpreted to mean that a husband can beat his wife. It's a supposed right which is the subject of intense debate among Muslim scholars and clerics alike."The exercise of the right to castigate does not fulfill the hardship criteria as defined by Paragraph 1565 (of German federal law)," the daily Frankfurter Rundschau quoted the judge's letter as saying. It must be taken into account, the judge argued, that both man and wife have Moroccan backgrounds.[...]

I want to stop here. (Please follow the link for the whole story.) I want to analyze the Judge's thinking in this case, and where it came from.

The Judge is using two multiculturalist premises:

1) All cultures are equal*.

2) It is not an undue hardship for a person to obey the expectations of his or her culture.

She also uses a very convenient legal strategy:

3) Foreign laws and customs "have a say" in Germany's enforcement of its laws.

The problem with (1) is not so much that it is wrong, but that it could not possibly be true. To declare that all cultures are equal is to deny every standard for judgement.

The problem with (2) is contradicted by history: all sorts of people have suffered unearned hardships in all sorts of cultures. Slavery, to use the clearest example, has been practiced in almost every society and for millenia, without many people being bothered by its existence until recently.

The problem with (3) is two-fold: there are no guarantees the traditions have any basis on justice, and the judges who cite foreign law and customs are simply reaching for an excuse to support their preferences. (Also notice that the people who want to uphold the value of foreign traditions, are usually the same doing the best to undermine national tradition**.)

The Judge's reasoning simply makes no sense. It is a testament to the power of ideology that intelligent people have come to believe this nonsense, and behave as if believing this nonsense was a moral duty. Not only this ruling, but the ideology behind this ruling, ought to be rejected publicly and thoroughly. The sooner we do this, the better we will be.

Notes:

* One of my missions in life is to tell people that multiculturalism does not mean simply that "all cultures are equally wonderful". It means that all cultures are equally wonderful, EXCEPT Western cultures, which are equally wicked.

** I don't know about this judge's specific views. I speak from experience, however.

Posted by Ruy Diaz at March 22, 2007 1:37 PM

Comments

Posted by: Catawhumpus at March 22, 2007 5:42 PM

Post a comment