Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...fe-honour-killing-attempts.html#ixzz1i7iSNWXz How sad. Instead of embracing a new life ,this kooks kin is forced into abandonment and mostly likely a host of issues that goes along with such psychological trauma....not to mention what might ever happen if the grandfather finds out.
If there was an indication that the nutcase father would actually DO the crimes (like saying he would do it), then this is an appropriate decision. However, the "indication" would have to be MORE than just simply that "dad is a Muslim", though, since 99.999% percent of Muslim fathers do NOT "honor kill" their families, despite the reality that there are plenty of daughters dating, getting pregnant and marrying non-Muslim men.
Does kinda look like it is a decision made on the perception of the family as to his reaction if he were to find out....and the judges perception of the unsuitabilty of the baby's father as to agreeing to the adoption completely outside her family connections. The teenager's father seems to be a first generation fundamentalist who is unable, or unwilling, to accept that a different country has different mores.......or at least his family thinks he is...and better safe than sorry when it comes to people's lives. Sure if he did it, he would be jailed.......but that wouldn't bring them back. But I do get so hacked off at the propensity of the anti-Muslim crowd wanting to make points to eternally quote the likes of the Daily Fail and the other UK redtops with an equally anti-Muslim agenda as if the crap they headline and report in an exaggerated way is common in the UK. Honour killing anyway is not an Islamic thing..it is a cultural controlling male thing which Hindus, Sikhs christians and those with no faith also practice...........in fact, hypocrisy abounds......a Sicilian man murdered his wife, who had been "disrespectful" to him, in 2007, he got off with only two days in prison. After all, she shouldn't have talked back. So not only is the act of violence the same, the culture looks the other way when the perpetrator doesn't practice Islam. Another Italian man tried to kill his wife, who had requested a divorce after he cheated on her, a leader of the White Cross Catholic organization, Father Igino Ciabattoni, called it an "act or love." (Love of his reputation, and not being exposed as a cheater whose wife left him?) Furthermore, Father Ciabattoni blamed the victim for "torturing her husband." a Catholic Italian man shot his sister to death for having a child out of wedlock. Up until 1991, men in Brazil could be absolved of killing their wives over honor. In Yemen, a Jewish father killed his daughter after a rabbi complained that she had a child from an affair. And a Christian father beat his daughter to death in 2005 in Palestine because she wanted to marry a Muslim. It is patriarchal societies which encourage those crimes....not religions. And it is the much vaunted Western preferred secular Muslim countries which condone it.....and the Islamic countries which don't. But, hell, why let facts get in the way of an agenda to daemonise Muslims, start WWIII and improve the Western economies by selling arms to all sides. Facts didn't stop us going into Afghanistan or Iraq....and won't stop us going into Iran....and I'll bet history written by us will read little different to a plea in mitigation by anyone who claims that all he did was an "honour killing"!
Huh? "Conjecture"? Got any figures that SHOW 99% of Muslims fathers wiping out their daughters for dating men they didn't like? Muslim girls date ALL KINDS of non-Muslim men (been there, done that! )! If your assertion had any truth to it AT ALL, there would be a daily blood bath in EVERY city wiht some Muslims in it, at least in the West! But there is not even a murder rate blip in cities with lots of Muslims. Fail!
Where is the proof that the father would lash out and kill his grand daughter if he knew she was born out of wedlock? I think the judges are overeacting here.
Not so sure about that..though the Daily Fail isn't overly guilty of allowing any facts getting in the way of a good story. The deciding factor would have to be the perception of the women in the family as to what his reaction would be according to their experience of his attitudes.....and they are the ones who appear to believe he is capable of and likely to do that. It would never have come before a court if they had not. Given the only possible proof would be if he actually killed the child, and then it would be too late to take the decision back....don't you think that would be giving him the benefit of a doubt his own family don't seem to have....and possibly lead to at least one death which could be avoided? I, for one, have no problem with children being removed from their birth family in a situation which is, on balance, likely to put them in harms way, particularly when others in that family agree with the reasons for removal. Shame that decisions are being made so much nowadays on irrational PC criteria and not on any criteria which apply to the welfare of the child...which is, after all, the only point of it.
Islamic culture demands blood for shame. Pity such backwards people are allowed in, in the first place.
