Until I read about this today, I wasn't aware that the actress who plays Padma Patil in the Harry Potter movies is Muslim. But apparently, despite the fact that Afshan Azad was allowed to accept a role in such in an appallingly infidel movie series as Harry Potter (playing a Hindu character who is a witch!), her family seems to have decided she was
(
Read more... )
As a person with strong religious beliefs, I can understand the frustration that a parent might feel about a child departing from those beliefs in such a substantial way as marrying outside the faith (although in this case, she seems to have just been *dating* the guy). But there are a *lot* of ways to express that distress/displeasure, and most of those ways don't come anywhere *near* physical violence and threats of death.
To the best of my knowledge, Islam is the only mainstream religion (and perhaps the only modern-day religion, apart from some tiny wacko-fringe cults) which believes that those who leave the faith should be summarily put to death. The degree to which practitioners of such a faith are coddled in today's society, while modern-day Christians continue to be derided for the long-since-denounced violence of centuries past, is truly disturbing. They say that politics makes strange bed-fellows, but I've never seen a stranger fellowship than that between the far left (historically vociferous *against* "superstitious" religion and *for* the absolute promotion of women's freedoms) and Islam (an uncompromising religion that promotes absolute patriarchy).
Reply
And I think that it's the same crowd that's embracing Islam just because it is old and has some decent art. How DARE we impose our morals outside of our borders! How DARE we not be tolerant of those inside!
I learned recently of the Chicago World's Fair, back in the day. The Mormons weren't allowed to have a display on the grounds because of polygamy, while the sheiks and their numerous wives were wined and dined all over the place (never mind that their religion also forbade alcohol.)
Reply
Female circumcision (or, more accurately, female genital mutilation) is certainly a serious logical conundrum for far-left feminists. The impulse to "protect" women from "harmful" social practices has been given free reign when it comes to Western practices. Western women are being "harmed" if a man so much as opens a door for a woman. And yet the same far-left feminists are strangely reticent to even criticize (at the very most) a practice that, for the sole benefit of male "honor" in a highly patriarchal culture, typically results in the loss of *any* sexual pleasure for the mutilated woman, and often causes a lifetime of discomfort every time she urinates. The kind of hypocrisy that can look down on American women who choose to stay home with their children, while at the same time looking the other way while Muslim women in Africa are sexually mutilated in the name of pleasing men, makes me sick.
Reply
Leave a comment