National emotions (via news blogs, articles, commentaries, etc.) are running the gamut from tightening up immigration laws to street justice to outrage – and, to be sure, these all have some validity. Of course, in the civilized and reasonable country that we purport to be, these are simply not moral or legal options. In fact, while we want the full force of the law to be thrown at those guilty of this horrific killing, Canadian law holds the position that they are actually innocent till proven guilty.
Bit by bit, we are coming to understand that there was some grief between the eldest of the three daughters and her father. She was, in fact, doing some things that other normal, red-blooded Canadian girls were doing. And for her desire to shop, date, dance, and other "normal" activities, she loses her life. And not only only hers, but, perhaps to cover up this heinous act, others are killed at the same time.
Then to add insult to injury, the term "honour killing" is thrown in. Talk about an oxymoron! I am not clear from that type of culture whether such a killing is a religious or a moral conviction, but I do know it is a wrong conviction (Wow: That should stew someone's tomatoes!) There are far more rational ways to deal with alleged disappointments.
Maybe dad should have tried curfews, time-outs, phone restrictions, or less computer time.
Self-defense? That's understandable. Taking out someone who is attacking your loved one? Agreed. There is no grace for random, senseless murder for its sheer pleasure, neither should there be any margin in any culture for ritualistic killings. And because one's particular view of one's cultural reputation is being rattled, people must die? I don't think so.
Any culture or religion that entertains the notion that children are things to be sacrificed on any premise, that wives are merely sexual chattel, or that the price of of personal offense is death, is not reasonable or rational. I would strongly suggest that cultures that embrace that worldview are doomed.
What has been dubbed as an "honour killing" in that culture is consider first-degree murder in ours and should be dealt with as such, culture and/or religion persuasions notwithstanding.
The irony is not lost here: The Lord in heaven knows we Canadians have many contradictory issues in our own culture that make many lawmakers somewhat hypocritical. The country we love has its own so-called honour killings, Western-culture style. We call it abortion.
The law that will judge this threesome is based on the Judeo-Christian principles, the bedrock of any law-loving, law-abiding democracy in the world. It is what has preserved the western culture from imploding for the last few hundred centuries, and the inverse is true in the eastern cultures. However, as Canada loses more and more of this legal, moral, and religious basis for its existence, what happened in Kingston could increase.
It is one thing to recognize differences in cultures and religions (they are inseparably linked), but it is quite another thing to condone them, let alone embrace them.
I was impressed by the number of bloggers that I read at CBC.ca that were justifiably outraged at this grisly act. In fact, I don't recall reading anyone who thought the killers did the right thing. We may disagree with relationships, values, viewpoints, and convictions of those with whom we differ, but killing someone to make it right simply makes it wrong. They have crossed the line.
Perhaps we should start with the right terminology: What happened in Kingston was a "dishonour killing." Nothing more, nothing less, nothing else.
No comments:
Post a Comment