[TETENAL]

Here's a nice one: "The husband can beat his wife"

A woman was filing for an accelerated divorce, because her husband (both muslims) was beating her and threatened to kill her. And what does the judge decide: That's no "hardship in marriage" because according to the Quran the husband has the right to castigate his wife. Sorry, no divorce.
The best part, and I guess this is "emancipation", the judge who decided that it is fine to beat women is a woman herself!

What do you think? Should the state respect religion so much as that religious peculiarities take precedence over secular law? I say no, that must not happen. The law of state must be applied equally and independently of religious rules. And while tolerance is important, intolerance towards intolerance is so as well. When others are suppressed, by religion or otherwise, one must step in.

[Railroader]

Perhaps the judge thinks the Qur'an is flawed and is using this situation to bring attention to the issue? That's the only feasible reason I can think of.

Otherwise it is her actions are preposterous.

[TETENAL]

It's not the job of a judge to make political statements on the back of a plaintiff. And if that would have been what the judge wanted to do, she would have done it publicly. It was the lawyer of the woman that made the judge's decision public, after she could not get it overturned within the court.

[Railroader]

What have the police done about the abuse then?

[OldManMac]

This judge shouldn't even be on the bench, if she's that confused as to which laws she's supposed to enforce. Intolerable!

[PER3]

Well, at least the guy who ripped out his wife's eyeballs got jail (even though he was the victim of an arranged marriage):

Jail for husband who ripped out wife's eyes - World - theage.com.au

[Jawbone54]

This is Europe, bowing before the Quran. Get used to it.

[Chuckit]

Does German law actually allow for this? No judge would even joke about that kind of thing here.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

This is Europe, bowing before the Quran. Get used to it.

This is Jawbone, blowing bubbles out the orifice that used to hide his brain. We've got used to it.

Still, it is unlikely that the case will be heard again before the mandated year of separation expires in May. But the judge who heard the case may have to face further consequences for her decision. On Wednesday, numerous politicians in Berlin voiced their horror at the verdict -- and demanded disciplinary action against the judge.

Further investigation

"In my opinion, this is a case of extreme violation of the rule of law that can't be solved with a mere conflict of interest ruling," Social Democrat parliamentarian Dieter Wiefelspütz told SPIEGEL ONLINE. "There have to be further consequences. This is a case for judicial supervision -- this case needs to be further investigated."
The deputy floor leader for the Christian Democrats, Wolfgang Bosbach, agreed. "This is a sad example of how the conception of the law from another legal and cultural environment is taken as the basis for our own notion of law," he said on Wednesday.

We also know you don't read much.

[TETENAL]

The court now cites the judge saying that in hindsight she doesn't understand the ruling any more herself and that she regrets her mistake. The court also says that she is still psychologically suffering from a shooting that happend 10 years ago in her courtroom where she was shot at, one plaintiff was killed and a lawyer life-threateningly injured. Only with luck she escaped death.

(update of the story in German)

[OldManMac]

If this tragic incident in her court room happened 10 years ago, it seems to me that, in that time period, there may have been been a tremendous lack of oversight of this judge's abilities to issue rulings that aren't affected by her psychological state. My German is rusty, so I didn't read the article, but I would question why she's still a judge if this issue is still hampering her after 10 years?

[Monique]

So, when she gets murdered that horrible husband, they should send the autopsy pictures to that judge.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Does German law actually allow for this?

No, it doesn't. Which is why this judge's misguided ruling is a headline scandal in ALL German news as of today.

[Powerbook]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

This is Europe, bowing before the Quran. Get used to it.

Yawn... get your head out of this dark "area" of yours...
Probably we should line up all Muzlims and give them a bullet in the head?

PB.

[Buckaroo]

Another reason to ban the Quran. The Quran should be outlawed. It will destroy freedom.

[Orion27]

Originally Posted by Jawbone54 

This is Europe, bowing before the Quran. Get used to it.

As it relates to European Freedoms:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...3/22/weu22.xml

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by Buckaroo 

Another reason to ban the Quran. The Quran should be outlawed. It will destroy freedom.

You no doubt don't get the irony in your statement.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Orion27 

As it relates to European Freedoms:
'Political correctness is killing our freedoms' | International News | News | Telegraph

In order to make a point, it's useful to comment on what you actually think a link says when posting completely unrelated information.

Just because the article contains the words "Europe", "Islam", and "freedom", that doesn't make it in any way relevant to this discussion. Apart from which, it throws up the rather interesting question of whether "freedom" isn't also the freedom to live according to different beliefs/rules, and to judge by them.

Hardly your intent, judging from your other intellectual oozings on this board.

[Orion27]

Originally Posted by analogika 

In order to make a point, it's useful to comment on what you actually think a link says when posting completely unrelated information.

Just because the article contains the words "Europe", "Islam", and "freedom", that doesn't make it in any way relevant to this discussion. Apart from which, it throws up the rather interesting question of whether "freedom" isn't also the freedom to live according to different beliefs/rules, and to judge by them.

Hardly your intent, judging from your other intellectual oozings on this board.

If you can't make the intellectual leap from political correctness to a judge ignoring the law and ruling agains an abused woman citing the Quaran as somehow relevant that's not by problem.

[Flashbang]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

Here's a nice one: "The husband can beat his wife"

A woman was filing for an accelerated divorce, because her husband (both muslims) was beating her and threatened to kill her. And what does the judge decide: That's no "hardship in marriage" because according to the Quran the husband has the right to castigate his wife. Sorry, no divorce.
The best part, and I guess this is "emancipation", the judge who decided that it is fine to beat women is a woman herself!

What do you think? Should the state respect religion so much as that religious peculiarities take precedence over secular law? I say no, that must not happen. The law of state must be applied equally and independently of religious rules. And while tolerance is important, intolerance towards intolerance is so as well. When others are suppressed, by religion or otherwise, one must step in.

I heard there are a couple of schools in Germany with seperate doors for jews and christians and another door for muslims.

Åre they slipping back to the old days before World War 2?

[OldManMac]

Originally Posted by Orion27 

If you can't make the intellectual leap from political correctness to a judge ignoring the law and ruling agains an abused woman citing the Quaran as somehow relevant that's not by problem.

If you had read any of the other posts in this thread, you would have realized that this judge has some psychological issues, and it has nothing to do with any leap to political correctness. You might want to check this site out. Digg - How To: Make a Tinfoil Hat

I haven't seen anyone, in a long, long, time, so quick to jump to conclusions, and having it pointed out to them, and come back for more.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Flashbang 

I heard there are a couple of schools in Germany with seperate doors for jews and christians and another door for muslims.

Åre they slipping back to the old days before World War 2?

I heard there are people stupid enough to believe anything they hear and to judge by that.

I heard some of those people are stupid enough to actually support fighting a war over hearsay.

Are they slipping back to the old days before high school?

[voodoo]

So, bottom line is that the judge was mentally unstable, unfit to judge and the whole thing is just one silly misunderstanding??

What-ho everyone.

V

[TETENAL]

That was the bottom-line of the court. The last thing I heard about the case.

But if you read the quoted article:

This isn't the first time that German courts have used cultural background to inform their verdicts. Christa Stolle of the women's rights organization Terre des Femmes said that in cases of marital violence, there have been a number of cases where the perpetrator's culture of origin has been considered as a mitigating circumstance -- although such verdicts have become seldom in recent years.

So this wasn't the first time that something like that happened. I don't think it was the stress condition of the judge that led to the decision. Such decisions are more likely the overapplication of political correctness. Hopefully this case sensitised juges to not fall for the political correctness trap in the future. Freedom of religion has its boundaries.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by analogika

This is Jawbone, blowing bubbles out the orifice that used to hide his brain. We've got used to it.

We also know you don't read much.

Originally Posted by Powerbook 

Yawn... get your head out of this dark "area" of yours...
Probably we should line up all Muzlims and give them a bullet in the head?

PB.

I actually forgot to check back in on this thread until it got bumped up today. I failed to see how nice you guys were being while I was away.

Love y'all too.

In the meantime (as we've already discussed in this forum), British schoolteachers are ceasing to teach about the Holocaust out of fear of offending Muslim students who have been taught in their mosques that it's a hoax of massive proportions.

Then again, this could be just more bubbling blowing out of the orifice that used to hide my brain.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

That was the bottom-line of the court. The last thing I heard about the case.

Good.

But if you read the quoted article:

But if I had, I would have wasted precious moments of my life. Ahh.. Nothing gets me going in the evening like the fresh breeze of Prussian patronizing.

So this wasn't the first time that something like that happened. I don't think it was the stress condition of the judge that led to the decision. Such decisions are more likely the overapplication of political correctness. Hopefully this case sensitised juges to not fall for the political correctness trap in the future. Freedom of religion has its boundaries.

Let us hope so, although it would be more reassuring to know that measures would have been made for judges in Germany to refrain from political correctness and follow the letter of the law.

I used to think that following rules to the letter came natural to Germans, but I see now that political correctness has become their second nature instead, overriding that otherwise convenient trait.

Politically correct people.. sigh.. Like mirrors for morality briefly filled with the opinions and values of those who actually possess these, for that fleeting moment of acquaintance, without ever possessing any of their own. Sort of moral psychopaths.

V

[analogika]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Good.


But if I had, I would have wasted precious moments of my life. Ahh.. Nothing gets me going in the evening like the fresh breeze of Prussian patronizing.

Drop the axe, you idiot. You'll cut yourself.

[olePigeon]

Does that mean Germans can stone prostitutes because the Bible says you can?

What a load of crap. I hate it when religion is mixed with politics and law.

[analogika]

So do we.

Which is why she's off the case.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by analogika 

Drop the axe, you idiot. You'll cut yourself.

This is precicely what I'm talking about. Prussian patronizing. Good job

V

[analogika]

Ah - I was beginning to wonder whether you'd missed it.

And as with every decent role-play, it takes at least two to tango, hun.

Have you entertained the thought that Tetenal's offending phrasing might be due to the fact that he's not a native English speaker? I mean, there's patronizing, and then there's arrogance in assumption...

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by analogika 

Ah - I was beginning to wonder whether you'd missed it.

And as with every decent role-play, it takes at least two to tango, hun.

Have you entertained the thought that Tetenal's offending phrasing might be due to the fact that he's not a native English speaker? I mean, there's patronizing, and then there's arrogance in assumption...

No, no, I was simply out of town the last couple of days. In the quiet countryside.

To be fair, TETENAL's jibe is by no means confined to those of Prussian descent. That was just a cheap shot by your's truly, I usually try the more sophisticated comebacks. I guess I was pressed for time or something.

Regardless of native tounge, it is arrogant/patronizing to imply that one hasn't taken time to read whatever text is being discussed *after* having already commented on said text. In German as well. Yes.

The 'reread text x' or 'if you had read text x, you'd already know that..' etc are common enough patronizing jabs and not bound to specific countries. Still in any language I know of and any country, this is a patronizing and unnecessary addition to any discussion.

Perhaps I misjudge TETENAL, but I cannot read anything from his reply, than that he honestly thinks I hadn't read the article in question. That's the arrogant part. Had he thought that I had read the article and wrote the same, it would have been patronizing. Or is it the other way around?

I do apologize to you TETENAL for implying your comment was Prussian arrogance.. This wasn't nearly as refreshing a gust of that in the morning! This was mere standard everyday arrogant comment you made.

V

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

The court now cites the judge saying that in hindsight she doesn't understand the ruling any more herself and that she regrets her mistake. The court also says that she is still psychologically suffering from a shooting that happend 10 years ago in her courtroom where she was shot at, one plaintiff was killed and a lawyer life-threateningly injured. Only with luck she escaped death.

(update of the story in German)

Was fuer ein Schmarrn. Armes Deutschland. Die Richterin gehoert abgesetzt.

-t

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Flashbang 

I heard there are a couple of schools in Germany with seperate doors for jews and christians and another door for muslims.

Åre they slipping back to the old days before World War 2?

Farking interweb rumors.

Show me ONE credible source for this. A blogs don't count.

-t