Muslim women in Germany reduced to third-class citizens, stripped of legal protections

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Do you believe in the rights of women, or do you believe in multiculturalism? A series of verdicts in the German courts in the past month, have shown with hot, hard logic that you can't back both. You have to choose.

The crux case centres on a woman called Nishal, a 26-year-old Moroccan immigrant to Germany with two kids and a psychotic husband. Since their wedding night, this husband beat the hell out of her. She crawled to the police covered in wounds, and they ordered the husband to stay away from her. He refused. He terrorised her with death threats.

So Nishal went to the courts to request an early divorce, hoping that once they were no longer married he would leave her alone. A judge who believed in the rights of women would find it very easy to make a judgement: you're free from this man, case dismissed.

But Judge Christa Datz-Winter followed the logic of multiculturalism instead. She said she would not grant an early divorce because - despite the police documentation of extreme violence and continued threats - there was no "unreasonable hardship" here.

Why? Because the woman, as a Muslim, should have "expected" it, the judge explained. She read out passages from the Koran to show that Muslim husbands have the "right to use corporal punishment". Look at Sura 4, verse 34, she said to Nishal, where the Koran says he can hammer you. That's your culture. Goodbye, and enjoy your beatings.

This is not a freakish exception. Germany's only state-level Minister for Integration, Armin Laschet, says this is only "the last link, for the time being, in a chain of horrific rulings handed down by the German courts".

[...]

In Germany today, Muslim women have been reduced to third-class citizens stripped of core legal protections - because of the doctrine of multiculturalism, which says a society should be divided into separate cultures with different norms according to ethnic origin.

http://comment.independent.co.uk/columnist...icle2496657.ece

[GrenadianCrix 2]

It's news to me that mulitculturalism removes any validity to the laws governing a country. If this judge were right then there are all sorts of things people could or could not do based on where they are from. So by ruling that multiculturalism overrides local or governmental law...he by rights puts himself out of a job. How can one judge the law when it differs from one person to the next?

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Unlike the multiculturists, I'm 100% for womans rights.

[Alex+R 0]

Multiculturalism does not need to be defined as seperate legal systems for different groups (but can be). This is a moronic conception of multiculturalism, as we can probably mostly all agree, and her rights to be protected by the German state should trump any religious rules the woman's group might impose within Germany. That's just...obvious.

eta: multiculturalism is a bit dated and limited at this point and it's odd to see the term still thrown around. The right idea is to find a third space for a new cultural identity to exist, IMO.

Edited May 4, 2007 by Alex+R

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Not obvious enough for that female German judge though.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

The judge is an idiot and no interpreter of Islamic law nor of the Quran. Nothing in the Quran or the Sunnah gives permission for Muslim husbands to hammer their wives. BTW, a few years ago in the US, a judge allowed an Asian immigrant to go free for killing his wife because his native culture allowed it. That makes two idiot judges.

[sereia 0]

Multiculturalism does not need to be defined as seperate legal systems for different groups (but can be). This is a moronic conception of multiculturalism, as we can probably mostly all agree, and her rights to be protected by the German state should trump any religious rules the woman's group might impose within Germany. That's just...obvious.

eta: multiculturalism is a bit dated and limited at this point and it's odd to see the term still thrown around. The right idea is to find a third space for a new cultural identity to exist, IMO.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

The judge is an idiot and no interpreter of Islamic law nor of the Quran. Nothing in the Quran or the Sunnah gives permission for Muslim husbands to hammer their wives. BTW, a few years ago in the US, a judge allowed an Asian immigrant to go free for killing his wife because his native culture allowed it. That makes two idiot judges.

004.034

YUSUFALI:

"Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all). "

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/004.qmt.html#004.034

[mawilson 2,133]

The judge is an idiot and no interpreter of Islamic law nor of the Quran. Nothing in the Quran or the Sunnah gives permission for Muslim husbands to hammer their wives.

I hope you're wrong, as you're definitely in need of some hammering.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Do you believe in the rights of women, or do you believe in multiculturalism? A series of verdicts in the German courts in the past month, have shown with hot, hard logic that you can't back both. You have to choose.

The crux case centres on a woman called Nishal, a 26-year-old Moroccan immigrant to Germany with two kids and a psychotic husband. Since their wedding night, this husband beat the hell out of her. She crawled to the police covered in wounds, and they ordered the husband to stay away from her. He refused. He terrorised her with death threats.

So Nishal went to the courts to request an early divorce, hoping that once they were no longer married he would leave her alone. A judge who believed in the rights of women would find it very easy to make a judgement: you're free from this man, case dismissed.

But Judge Christa Datz-Winter followed the logic of multiculturalism instead. She said she would not grant an early divorce because - despite the police documentation of extreme violence and continued threats - there was no "unreasonable hardship" here.

Why? Because the woman, as a Muslim, should have "expected" it, the judge explained. She read out passages from the Koran to show that Muslim husbands have the "right to use corporal punishment". Look at Sura 4, verse 34, she said to Nishal, where the Koran says he can hammer you. That's your culture. Goodbye, and enjoy your beatings.

This is not a freakish exception. Germany's only state-level Minister for Integration, Armin Laschet, says this is only "the last link, for the time being, in a chain of horrific rulings handed down by the German courts".

[...]

In Germany today, Muslim women have been reduced to third-class citizens stripped of core legal protections - because of the doctrine of multiculturalism, which says a society should be divided into separate cultures with different norms according to ethnic origin.

http://comment.independent.co.uk/columnist...icle2496657.ece

This commentary is nonsense. Any person in Germany has the protection the Grundgesetz (Constitution) offers. There are no classes of citizens defined in that document that Germany takes pretty seriously. Yes, there were a number of odd verdicts lately. But the first one mentioned, for example, didn't stand. The judge actually apologized for this misguided decision. There are checks and balances in place in Germany that see to it that all citizens enjoy the same protection under the law. I have yet to see the high court upholding any of these misguided verdicts. When that happens, the commentator may have a point. Until then, it's a pretty ignorant rant.

Edited May 4, 2007 by ET-US2004

[rclouse 0]

The judge is an idiot and no interpreter of Islamic law nor of the Quran. Nothing in the Quran or the Sunnah gives permission for Muslim husbands to hammer their wives. BTW, a few years ago in the US, a judge allowed an Asian immigrant to go free for killing his wife because his native culture allowed it. That makes two idiot judges.

[Otto 83]

I hate to burst the "This is Outrageous" Bubble... but it's simply not true..

The judge, named in the above article, was subsequently removed after her radical judgment (which was also a thread here a while back)...

[Saddle Bronc 124]

It's news to me that mulitculturalism removes any validity to the laws governing a country. ...

You obviously haven't seen the results in Canada then, where the following concessions were won by Sikhs:

• exemptions from wearing hardhat on construction-site or when working under locomotive (so long as turban is worn)
  
• "initiated" Sikh students can without issue wear 3" (blade-length) daggers on person--and there were cases where Sikh elders wanted the schools to allow 8" blades
  

Edited May 4, 2007 by CherryXS

[Sofiyya 1,687]

The judge is an idiot and no interpreter of Islamic law nor of the Quran. Nothing in the Quran or the Sunnah gives permission for Muslim husbands to hammer their wives. BTW, a few years ago in the US, a judge allowed an Asian immigrant to go free for killing his wife because his native culture allowed it. That makes two idiot judges.

004.034

YUSUFALI:

"Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all). "

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/004.qmt.html#004.034

The Quran is a book that defies the posting of any one verse as definitive. It takes more than reading that to prove your point, and that is why the judge was wrong.

The judge is an idiot and no interpreter of Islamic law nor of the Quran. Nothing in the Quran or the Sunnah gives permission for Muslim husbands to hammer their wives.

I hope you're wrong, as you're definitely in need of some hammering.

Are you advocating violence against me?

[Niels Bohr 72]

It's news to me that mulitculturalism removes any validity to the laws governing a country. If this judge were right then there are all sorts of things people could or could not do based on where they are from. So by ruling that multiculturalism overrides local or governmental law...he by rights puts himself out of a job. How can one judge the law when it differs from one person to the next?

If culture is a means to improvise laws, then I don't know if the validity of law enforcement have any bearings on convictions. Society as we know it will be a big mess of corruption like Cambodia!