Raven Paradox

… hmmm, maybe I should rethink the heading - some sects may take that literally - speaking of which, what is the difference between a religion and a cult? A couple of thousand years I would say, but I digress…

Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali is a bloody idiot. It is reported that during a Ramadan sermon, he suggested that perhaps women were somehow responsible for being raped because they “sway suggestively” and wore make-up and immodest dress.

For Satan’s sake, what good is global warming if women have to cover themselves up? The one good thing about the hole in the ozone layer is the fact that it gets hotter earlier and stays so for longer… attractive women dressed appropriately for the season is one of the great things about the Australian summer - and it isn’t just good for the typical hetrosexual male and lesbian - with shirtless young men parading about, women and gay gentlemen (resplendent in flared trousers and orange cravats) also have a veritable visual feast to gorge themselves upon.

But that is the point - is is a visual feast, not a smorgasboard for rapists.

No one can deny that you see many more shirtless men in summer than you do women (which is a pity), yet how often do you hear of gangs of women raping men? You don’t - (and not because such things are considered as fantasy by many men) - but because most women are able to maintain a modicum of decorum (except on hen’s nights) and behave in a socially acceptable manner.

Sheik al-Hilali’s comments are reprehensible:

Taken from:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20646437-601,00.html

In the religious address on adultery to about 500 worshipers in Sydney last month, Sheik Hilali said: “If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it … whose fault is it, the cats or the uncovered meat?

“The uncovered meat is the problem.”

The sheik then said: “If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab, no problem would have occurred.”

He said women were “weapons” used by “Satan” to control men.

“It is said in the state of zina (adultery), the responsibility falls 90 per cent of the time on the woman. Why? Because she possesses the weapon of enticement (igraa).”

And this coming from a man who felt “humiliated” when searched at the airport in 2003. Imagine if he had been raped - or gang raped.

Whilst it is tempting to blame Islam for these disgusting attitudes and comments, I don’t think that it is entirely fair to do so - true, they are given voice by an influential Muslim, however I don’t think that Islam can claim a trademark on bad attitudes toward women.

Whilst Christianity has been around for a few more centuries than Islam and moderated many of its practices in the last few decades, women are still treated in many ways, as second class citizens - particularly by the Catholic Church.

For reasons best known only to themselves, women are not permitted by many Christian religions to serve as priests - and indeed, at traditional Catholic weddings are told that they are but the servants of their husbands.

The prophet of Christianity is quoted as having some interesting things to say about sex and women:

“whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.”

Matthew 5:28

While he was at a wedding, Jesus’ mother Mary informed him that there was no wine. His retort was, “Woman, what have I to do with thee? Mine hour is not yet come.”

John 2:1-3

So whilst Pell, Jensen and their ilk have stopped short of blaming women when they are raped by animals masquerading as men, it is clear that their prophet viewed women as lesser beings and creatures responsible for the tempting of men.

The mufti’s comments cannot be tolerated. There is no context in which they can be accepted. Yes, we supposedly live in a democracy with freedom of speech and thought, however justifying such base criminal acts as rape is reprehensible and those making such assertions need to have a good hard look at themselves and ponder whether or not they would enjoy being raped themselves - or having someone close to them raped.

At the same time, we may need to look at the attitudes of a society which still, in a supposedly enlightened age, actively discriminates against women in the workplace, religion and to a degree - as evidenced by that clown’s sermon, in society.

A good place to start would be the Catholic Church - Pell and Ratzinger, not known for their love of Islam, could gain a great jump on their nemesis religion by actively working to remove the inherent discrimination that Catholicism has for so long enshrined:

• Allow female priests
• Remove the dictum’s of subservience that are littered throughout the texts and sacraments
• Recognise the role of women in society and religion

Until such a time that they themselves can, in good faith (no pun intended) cast the first stone, we should hear nothing from the leaders of the various Christian organisations on this matter.

Technorati Tags: Mufti, Islam, Women, Catholic, Pell, Christian, Rape, Jesus, Sermon