Monday, January 21, 2008

Why isn't this on the evening news?

Islam denigrates women. The Christian faith glorifies women. The evidence is everywhere to see. But perhaps the most despicable example of this is the practice of female circumcision. The reason this is done is to reduce and/or prevent sexual pleasure. This is not "circumcision" at all. To call it that makes one think that it somehow related to the Jewish practice or the medical procedure so many of us are familiar with. It's nothing like that. It's the barbaric mutilation of female genitalia in the name of Allah. It's designed to prevent women from experiencing sexual pleasure. Supposedly, this promotes proper Islamic piety.


There's a photo spread on this in the New York Times Magazine. The featured clinic is in Indonesia, but this mutilation is perpetrated on women in Middle Eastern and North African Muslim nations.

6 comments:

Al said...

Are you willing to see 6th century jurisprudence consigned to the dustbin of history? Sure, their will be no more mutilations, but at what cost? Imagine a world without the phrase ‘Allah Akbar’ followed by the sound of a knife unsheathed, a scream and the soft gurgle of blood pooling in a windpipe.

It is a cultural thing... You are simply a western chauvinist, with your desire to see the world come to Christ. If you had your way we would have church discipline instead of stonings and barring from the Lord’s Table instead of beheadings.

Who wants to live in a world like that?

Oh yeah… almost everyone else besides these God haters.

al sends

Jeff Cagle said...

This is not "circumcision" at all. To call it that makes one think that it somehow related to the Jewish practice or the medical procedure so many of us are familiar with.

Well, and that's the purpose. The NYT has a history of opposing male circumcision also:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A07E5D71331F931A25752C1A9649C8B63
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/25/us/25brfs-003.html
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/tag/circumcision/

That position is changing recently because of the anti-AIDS effect:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/23/science/23hiv.html

But still and all, there's a purposeful effort to link these two practices together. The (legitimately!) tear-jerker pictures on the photo essay could have easily been taken of young boys also.

Jeff C

sensusplenior said...

I was surprised to see this on the NY Times too. Hopefully they see themselves as exposing the fruitless deeds of darkness...

Al said...

I wonder if the 72 virgins have undergone such a proceedure?

al sends

Al said...

or procedure for that matter.

al sends

Jeff Cagle said...

Stupid joke day:

http://www.myspinzone.net/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&p=442

Jeff C