Mother on death row in Sudanese jail.

We can't be sure of that. (mysogyny) I wonder if there have ever been a case of a Muslim man marrying a Christian woman in Sudan. And changing his faith to do so.

for MiceElf's post, spot on

I beg to differ. The central issue in this case is misogyny. The hatred that so many men have towards women. They may use religion as a justification, they may use tradition as a justification, they may simply enjoy the privileges of the powerful and resist all attempts to change the status quo.

That is what needs challenging, wherever it is found, in whatever society it is found, in whatever predominant philosophy, tradition or religion it is found.

Until women and men are equal in society oppression of all kinds will continue to exist in greater or lesser degree.

I don't blame religion for everything! - I am of course fully aware that barbarities are perpetrated in the name of all sort of philosophies and of none.

I am just saying that the suggestion that it has nothing to do with this particular case is erroneous. It is the central issue in this case.

Concern about religion's role in atrocities and inhumanity is not a "sterile argument". It is a serious concern shared by people of faith and of none - and rightly so.

Really Mishap and others, this is a thoroughly sterile argument which you have made many times on this forum.

Sadly, human being have killed each other, mutilated each other and enslaved each other since time immemorial.

This is a manifestation of flawed humanity and a simplistic blaming of 'religion' as a cause of this is just ridiculous.

Anyone with just the most basic knowledge of history will recall the six million Jews killed by the Nazis under the leadership of the atheist Hitler. The millions killed by the atheist Pol Pot, the slaughter of the Armenians, the genocides in Africa where the Hutu murdered the Tutsis, the terrible slaughter in Equatorial Guinea, and so on and so on. No one with an ounce of sense would blame this events on the fact that their perpetrators were atheist. They happen for a multitude of reasons bound up with the history and development of nations or tribes and are often the consequence of a struggle for resources, although not always.

Let's for once just condemn inhumanity whenever we find it, wherever it happens and whoever is the perpetrator.

Oh, it means Christian does it?! I thought it must be some sort of way-out sect I've never heard of!

I can't stand it when people put ridiculous abbreviations in posts without stopping to,think, will everyone know what I mean. Occasionally I will google the meaning but more often than not, I leave the thread.

Not any more odd than Xmas when you think of it . I hope this poor woman and her children are released , I must admit to not reading all the thread but am wondering why she is only imprisoned now and not several years ago when she married ? and do the proponents of her incarceration think it is worse to marry a Christian than to have 12 year old girls being married to elderly men of the "Right" "Faith". Not so long ago Irish Catholic girls who chose to marry Protestant boys were thrown out of home and Church

I was wondering what Xtian meant...
What a strange abbreviation.

AAA - I assume your use of textspeak is not meant to be disrespectful to Christians but is it really much more effort to write Christian instead of Xtian
(assuming that is who you were referring to)
I really hope that this lady is released as soon as possible

We cannot ignore the religious element in this current barbarity - it is central to what is happening. It is the "main issue." A cruel, mindless and intransigent element in a world religion is inflicting this barbarity on an innocent woman.

I do not know how we influence the perpetrators to behave humanely. As has already been said, pressure from the west may cause them to dig their heels in even more. So what can we do?

Those of a religious persuasion cannot ignore the fact that many of the barbarities in this world are perpetrated in the name of one religion or another. This is not a criticism of individuals who subscribe to a faith, but an observation of fact, which is the central issue in this dreadful case.

The past is past and the history of it can't be changed. What has been changed is some of the attitudes that were held in the past.

In this country:-

Fixit Jim may have "got away with it" during his lifetime, but others are now nervously waiting for retribution. He fooled Mother Church, among others, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.

Alan Turing would not be persecuted here for his sexual orientation, because laws here have been changed (but not everywhere in the world)

Pregnancy as a result of rape can be terminated (again, in this country, not everywhere).

In the UK, "Prisoners give birth in hospital, where since 1996, they should not be shackled during labour" - though in the USA they may still be shackled. ( www.maternityaction.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/prisonsreport.pdf from report addressing the needs of pregnant women, mothers, and babies in prison )

The comments on this thread are from posters at this time and (mostly) in this country. We are not perfect, but we do try, and we should not be silent.

'Xtian fear and loathing of their own sexual feelings' thatbags? I could have quoted extensively from any of AAA's posts but I think this one example suggests a certain amount of focus on the religious aspects of the story.

I used 'purporting' because I have no immediate and direct evidence of what you referred to AAA (e.g. women being shackled to childbirth beds) without a laborious checking of the details. That is not saying your assertions were mistaken, nor is it saying that I don't agree that such things happened, only that I know nothing about it.

Similarly, I used the term about arguing 'tactics' from a neutral position. I was not criticising the method of argument, merely describing it.

I agree with what elegran said at 0907.

I don't think AAA was concentrating on the religious element of some barbaric practices, lily. He just mentioned that aspect, which does recur quite frequently in the history of mankind.

That was to AAAHappyman btw (who sounds anything but happy)

I don't think anyone is " deflecting concern with severe problems in one's own society by pointing at wrongs under other regimes" as you suggest. We are showing our extreme concern for a woman in horrible circumstances through no fault of her own. What can be wrong with that?

(I do find your posts a bit hard to decipher with all that light and dark stuff going on)

(And I don't think you make a very sensible point either)

AAA I have said before on this and other threads to the point of tedium that concentrating on the element of religion in this and other stories, distracts us from the main issue. Equally distracting is to refer to evil acts done by a different set of people. We are each responsible and answerable for our own actions. Failing to denounce injustice is also wrong.

So are you recommending that we ignore (and thus collude with) the shackling and possible death of a woman, because not everything in our society is or has been perfect?

"Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but don't consider the beam that is in your own eye?" We should wash out our own eye, yes of course, but we do have two of them, and we can see with the other that it is barbaric that she should be treatyed so.

annodomini Tue 03-Jun-14 23:27:16
AAAHappyMan..... Why drag Alan Turing into the mix?
I was pointing to the treatment, in both senses of the word, of A T, and hundreds more - fuelled by the Xtian fear and loathing of their own sexual feelings. Even now Xtians in UK are kicking lumps out of each other about whether women are fully huMAN, or not. As recently reported on that organ of right wing propaganda, BBC's Woman's Hour, some xtian women priests are being so abused by their male counterparts that they have been driven to the verge of suicide. And some have committed that mortal sin. Where's Free speech there?

thatbags Wed 04-Jun-14 07:17:26
And it's a commonly used arguing tactic that AAA is using.
Please enlighten me on how this is a 'tactic' rather than a plain statement of the facts and a call for some element of introspection.

thatbags Wed 04-Jun-14
+....AAA is talking about outrageous contraventions of human rights too.
Thank you.
+....Ones that purportedly
[purportedly = supposedly, putatively or reputedly (WikiP) ]
You mean there are doubts that these things happened?
+.... I think the point is that "the mighty" in places like Sudan, .... can throw such instances back at us when we criticise them.
Whilst that is a valid point, I'm not concerned with their opinion, I'm concerned with the Machiavellian / Animal Farm, ploy of deflecting concern with severe problems in one's own society by pointing at wrongs under other regimes.
+....That doesn't mean that our criticisms are not justified but it is pertinent to the discussion.
I agree.................. I agree.

But we are free to publicly criticise the things that AAA mentioned, and to work to change flaws in our society. That is the difference.

... from a certain point of view.

And it's a commonly used arguing tactic that AAA is using.

AAA is talking about outrageous contraventions of human rights too. Ones that purportedly happened here not so long ago. I think the point is that "the mighty" in places like Sudan, where inhuman laws are still used, can throw such instances back at us when we criticise them. That doesn't mean that our criticisms are not justified but it is pertinent to the discussion.

AAAHappyManI fail to see how this contributes in any way to the consideration of this outrageous contravention of human rights. Why drag Alan Turing into the mix?