25 comments

[ 4.4 ms ] story [ 80.4 ms ] thread
[flagged]
This homicide is obviously included in San Francisco crime statistics.
you're ignoring the debate that is taking place in the press as to whether this crime is indicative of some broader trend or not, a debate I'm not sure you are ignorant of.
[flagged]
Hadn’t considered that angle. But then he would fess up to it etc right?
Or just your regular macho kind of thing. Maybe we'll learn something from a confession. Maybe not.
It’s 2023 and everything and everyone gets called out but subtle Islamophobia is not on anyone’s radar.

Read a middle eastern name and were shocked at something horrendous. Must be Islam that backwards religion .. smh

Edit: Fyi there’s nothing Islamic about honor killings. According to any “academic” and “mainstream” scholar of Islam extra judicial retaliation/vigilantism is not okay. And the Islamic penal code for illegal sexual intercourse or Zina has an impossible bar of 4 eye witnesses and both the man and woman get punished but not killed. No modern Muslim state implements sharia fairly if they do it at all.

The popular notion of Islamic honor killings is just ignorant and lawless hooliganry which commentators and the media like to present as somehow representative of Islam or its teachings … Islamophobia

It is not unreasonable to speculate about it as long as we consider other things too. To name a few: crypto losses, drunken argument, brain damage
The speculation is fine. It’s the term it self. It would be better to call it Muslim honor killing or preferably just honor killing.
I've heard it both ways: "Muslim" is the correct way, or "Islamic" is the correct way.

Let the judicial process consider it as a possible motive, but don't make assumptions. We already saw what happened with the now-debunked public speculation of an unhoused perpetrator.

(comment deleted)
Speculating motives based on surname is, I agree, bigoted. On the rest, I disagree.

You are essentially making a theological argument, that "academic, mainstream" Islam is the "real" Islam.

As a nonbeliever, this is meaningless to me. There is no "real" Islam, Christianity or such. Only what beilieving people believe.

The reality in many places is that honour killings exist, and even if rare, are a substantial cultural force keeping women in line. It's not exclusively Islamic, and they definitely have many origins historically. However, it is blind to ignore the relationship with the religion. It doesn't happen in secular circles.

Imagine a history book teaching the crusades that refuses to label them "Christian," because "real" modern Christianity has disavowed them.

Religions are not neutral, or innocent by default.

Do a lot of fundamentalist Muslims live in SF?
Usually the phrase "honor killing" would involve someone killing their own family member. For example, here's a definition from Human Rights Watch: "Honor crimes are acts of violence, usually murder, committed by male family members against female family members who are perceived to have brought dishonor upon the family."

https://www.hrw.org/legacy/press/2001/04/un_oral12_0405.htm

This is awful. On a legal note, is this level of detail normal before a trial? I feel like I just read the case for the prosecution. Does this not prejudice any future fair trial?

Edit: I am glad to see this flagged. This story felt our of character both for a major news organisation and for this place.

I also don't think it's appropriate. I hope there weren't any political motivations involved in this over-sharing. The victims and perpetrators both have rights to due process, and we shouldn't encroach on them for the political sake of debunking Elon.
(comment deleted)