Originally Posted by doc1
We have enough problems here in the US. I hope we don't start importing this s**t.
This is already a problem in the US.
Rape of, and incest with, young women and girls is nothing new. Nor is it new that it's done by religious people, in religious contexts, and that other people back off so they can seem supportive of cultural difference and freedom of religious practice.
The US doesn't deal with its Muslim communities in quite the same way, sure, because I don't think Muslims have quite the same sort of political and social prominence in the US. But the UK doesn't have problems with Fundamental Latter Day Saints compounds that the US does. And look at the argument many made there: it's religious freedom, don't get involved, it's not your culture so you can't understand. This doesn't stop the majority of people believing that FLDS lifestyle and culture, just like fundamental Muslim culture, oppresses women and girls and should be prevented from doing so.
I don't care what Rowan Williams or Gordon Brown says about cultural sensitivity: before cultural sensitivity comes the practice and enforcement of basic human rights, such as the right tonever be raped, tortured, or forced into marriage. I think it's pathetic that cultural relativism has been so misinterpreted by these people in power to mean that we should turn a blind eye, EVER, to sexual abuse.
I think The Times only went after this story because of the Christian angle. This woman was not threatened SOLELY because she was a Christian. Her life was threatened because she was living in an oppressive and dictatorial household intolerant of any beliefs that went against their own, so much so that they thought raping their child was the only suitable punishment. If this woman had said she was an atheist, I don't know that this story would have been quite as appealing to the Times.