Newsflash: Spain "not the Arabian desert of 14 centuries ago..."

[DRoseDARs]

The prophet Muhammed would not approve of you, Mr. Mustafa. Good on Spain for convicting this low life scum.

http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/sto...2.htm&sc=reodd

Imam Convicted for Advice on How to Beat Wives


MADRID (Reuters) - A Spanish court sentenced an imam to 15 months in prison Wednesday for writing a book instructing husbands how to beat their wives without leaving bruises.

A lawyer for the Egyptian-born imam, Mohamed Kamal Mustafa, 44, vowed to appeal, telling state radio the ruling was unjust.

The Barcelona court found Mustafa guilty of provoking violence on the basis of gender in his book "Women in Islam," published in 2000.

The book recommends that in the case of a "rebellious woman" a husband should attempt "serene dialogue" and if that fails, refuse to sleep in the same bed.


If rebellion persists, the woman should be struck in a "symbolic" way and "without excesses," the court order cited the book as saying.


"If one needs to use blows, they should be administered to specific parts of the body like the feet and hands, using a light and thin stick so it will not leave scars or bruising on the body," read an excerpt from the book quoted in the ruling.


In the trial Mustafa argued that much of his advice was based on the Koran, the Muslim holy book.


But the court said today's society was "not the Arabian desert of 14 centuries ago," and ruled that some passages violated the penal code and women's constitutional rights, partly because Mustafa was a prayer leader with influence over people at his mosque near Malaga, on the southern coast.


Spanish media reported that Mustafa would not go to jail because first time offenders in Spain who receive terms of less than 28 months usually have their sentences suspended.


The court also fined Mustafa 2,160 euros ($2,742) and ordered copies of the book to be confiscated, according to the written court order.


The court said parts of the book addressing menstruation, childbirth, makeup and clothing promoted sexual discrimination that was "intolerable and criminally reproachable."



01/15/04 08:47


© Copyright Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved. The information contained In this news report may not be published, broadcast or otherwise distributed without the prior written authority of Reuters Ltd.

[Nubclear]

I have a small question: Why is it that Europe seems hellbent on preventing any free speech it considers "immoral" in some fashion?

[DRoseDARs]

Beating your wife is generally not considered "free speech" by civilized peoples. Beyond that, I think Europeans have, at the subconcious level, had enough of constant violence and hate on their continent. Well-meaning legislation is still tainted with prejudices and ends up being this side of hateful.

[Imran Siddiqui]

The book recommends that in the case of a "rebellious woman" a husband should attempt "serene dialogue" and if that fails, refuse to sleep in the same bed.

If rebellion persists, the woman should be struck in a "symbolic" way and "without excesses," the court order cited the book as saying.

"If one needs to use blows, they should be administered to specific parts of the body like the feet and hands, using a light and thin stick so it will not leave scars or bruising on the body," read an excerpt from the book quoted in the ruling.

While it ain't right, why has this led to such an uproar and banning? I'm with Tass: why is Europe hellbent on preventing free speech?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Beating your wife is generally not considered "free speech" by civilized peoples.

He wasn't convicted for 'beating his wife', but writing a book.

[The Mad Monk]

dp

[The Mad Monk]

"Thin light stick"?

the way they were carrying on about it, you'd think he was discussing phonebooking.

[DRoseDARs]

Something about "inciting violence" comes to mind. Probably don't want like-minded morons getting the idea that it's ok to beat their wives since some imam wrote a book. One less opportunity to shirk responcibility for your own actions.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Something about "inciting violence" comes to mind. Probably don't want like-minded morons getting the idea that it's ok to beat their wives since some imam wrote a book. One less opportunity to shirk responcibility for your own actions.

So you consider this 'inciting violence' so that it can be banned? What if you have a book saying if your child gets rowdy, you should smack him firmly on the butt, but without excess. Should that book be banned because it may incite child abuse?

I'm just glad that in the US something like this wouldn't be banned. Just because we think it's wrong doesn't mean we should silence it. That's also part of freedom of speech... freedom for the one we don't like.

[DRoseDARs]

This wasn't in the United States, it was in Europe (Spain). Yes, I support this censoring over there because Europe has a major problem of lingering hatreds. They don't need additional crap being brought into the equation. If the imam wasn't going to like the fact he couldn't beat wives, he should have moved to Saudi Arabia. He lives in Spain, he should have known better, now he faces the consequences.

[FrustratedPoet]

Judging from the views in this thread I think I'll write a book on the best ways to abuse children without leaving any physically traceable evidence. Sounds like it'd be a winner in the States. Yay for my free speech!

[Asher]

If you ask me, somebody slipped up by letting this case leak out to the public. If you're going to do censorship, don't do it the half-assed European way.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yes, I support this censoring over there because Europe has a major problem of lingering hatreds.

So if you have lingering hatreds you shouldn't have free speech? And are you saying that the US has NO lingering hatreds dealing with race?

If the imam wasn't going to like the fact he couldn't beat wives, he should have moved to Saudi Arabia. He lives in Spain, he should have known better, now he faces the consequences.

Is there any proof he beat his wife? And he isn't facing the consequences for 'beating' (there is no evidence he has done so), but for writing about beating. He obviously thought he had free speech rights, something that is a reasonable assumption. I guess you think he should have 'known' better.

[Drake Tungsten]

Yay for my free speech!

I'm glad you've finally learned what freedom is all about from the people who invented it.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Is there any proof he beat his wife?

Wasn't the purpose of the book to instruct how to beat the wife without leaving any evidence?

[DRoseDARs]

Imran, I never stated my belief Mustafa beat his own wife, though Asher makes a good point. Either way, instructing people how to beat others does not qualify as free speech as far as I'm concerned.

And yes, my contention is still that he should have known better. He isn't living in the Middle East, he's in Europe. The cultures are different and he should have educated himself as to what would have and would not have be viewed kindly upon by his non-knuckledragging neighbors.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Wasn't the purpose of the book to instruct how to beat the wife without leaving any evidence?

Not at all. I quoted the passages to show the bias in the article. Again, you don't want to leave bruises and scars because that would be EXCESSIVE! He said just in a symbolic way, ie, not to cause great pain... kinda like the nuns in relgious schools tapping a ruler across people's hands.

Judging from the views in this thread I think I'll write a book on the best ways to abuse children without leaving any physically traceable evidence. Sounds like it'd be a winner in the States. Yay for my free speech!

A. It wouldn't be banned.

B. Read what I wrote to Asher about this.

[Drake Tungsten]

The prophet Muhammed would not approve of you, Mr. Mustafa.

Yes, he would...

[Imran Siddiqui]

Either way, instructing people how to beat others does not qualify as free speech as far as I'm concerned.

So something isn't free speech if you don't agree with it? Way to go .

I guess you are going to ban video games because instructing people on how to kill others doesn't qualify as free speech, yeah?

my contention is still that he should have known better. He isn't living in the Middle East, he's in Europe. The cultures are different and he should have educated himself as to what would have and would not have be viewed kindly upon by his non-knuckledragging neighbors.

So contrary views are not welcome in the West? Are you sure we aren't knuckledragging then?

[DRoseDARs]

*Sigh* Instructing people how to physically harm others is not ok and should not be considered free speech anymore than yelling fire in a movie theater. Harm can come from yelling fire, but it doesn't necessarily happen. Harm can come from people reading this book, but it doesn't necessarily happen. Why is one instance forbodden and the other not? Why is one free speech and the other not?

Civilized people don't treat women as possessions. I'm tolerant of most things, but I flat-out do not approve of any Human being treated as second-class citizens (or worse) anywhere.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I'm just glad that in the US something like this wouldn't be banned. Just because we think it's wrong doesn't mean we should silence it. That's also part of freedom of speech... freedom for the one we don't like.

This from a guy who wants to ban fighting in hockey.

[Drake Tungsten]

Instructing people how to physically harm others is not ok and should not be considered free speech anymore than yelling fire in a movie theater.

So, you want to ban all books on martial arts as well? Where do you draw the line?

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Tingkai


This from a guy who wants to ban fighting in hockey.

Come on, let's not split hairs.

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Quote:

Instructing people how to physically harm others is not ok and should not be considered free speech anymore than yelling fire in a movie theater.

So, you want to ban all books on martial arts as well? Where do you draw the line?

Not every movement in the martial arts involves breaking your opponent's neck in 56 places. Many involve keeping them away without causing any harm. Martial arts are a cultural thing, like beating wives, and you have to weigh carefully what is and is not acceptable treatment of another person. Life-and-death combat is a whole other realm from what most of us are used to, so much of the ma is merely performance anyway. The imam calls for the training of your wife to obey you through negative reenforcement, not to put on a performance for friends and relatives.

[Sprayber]

How about movies where wife beating is depected?

[notyoueither]

Actually, that would most likely end you up in court in Canada too.

The Americans seem to be alone in placing freedom for self over rights for all others effected by self.

[DRoseDARs]

Work-of-fiction vs. instruction manual. Still in poor taste, but many people have enough sense in their head to not take the movie as a green light to beat their wife.

[St Leo]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Actually, that would most likely end you up in court in Canada too.

Are you sure? Irreversible made it through fine.

[Drake Tungsten]

What if the movie is called "How to Beat Your Wife The Muslim Way"?

[notyoueither]

You are not free to yell 'Fire' in a theatre, and you are not allowed to give instructions on how to beat your wife and hide it. Where is the huge leap?