German judge invokes Qur'an to deny abused wife a divorce

[cali]

As far as I'm concerned this judge doesn't belong on the bench. Weird story.


Kate Connolly in Berlin
Friday March 23, 2007
The Guardian


A German judge who refused a Moroccan woman a fast-track divorce on the grounds that domestic violence was acceptable according to the Qur'an has been removed from the case following a nationwide outcry.
The judge, Christa Datz-Winter, said the German woman of Moroccan descent would not be granted a divorce because she and her husband came from a "Moroccan cultural environment in which it is not uncommon for a man to exert a right of corporal punishment over his wife," according to a statement she wrote that was issued by a Frankfurt court. "That's what the claimant had to reckon with when she married the defendant."

The 26-year-old mother of two had been repeatedly beaten and threatened with death by her husband.

When the woman protested against the judge's decision, Ms Datz-Winter invoked the Qur'an to support her argument. In the court she read from verse 34 of Sura four of the Qur'an, An-Nisa (Women), in which men are told to hit their wives as a final stage in dealing with disobedience. The verse reads: "... as to those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them and leave them alone in the sleeping places and beat them".


<snip>

http://www.guardian.co.uk/germany/article/0,,2040982,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=12

[fasttense]

1. Just another excuse for an abusive man.

So if the man married a woman of germanic descent would the judge have ruled otherwise? I don't think so. The judge and husband are misogynists (How come they have a word for the hatred of women but not for the hatred of men?) and chance seems to have conspired and brought the two together against this woman. I hope she keeps fighting.

[pampango]

6. Unless the German courts are going to apply Islamic law to

all Germans, this judge is applying a different set of laws for Muslim immigrants than applies to "real" Germans.

What country has a different set of laws that apply for each religions? Every country has tensions and pressures from differing ethnic and religious groups on matters of legislation and judicial interpretation, but you have to adopt a common set of laws that applies to everyone.

[Canuckistanian]

2. Oh, great

Quoting any religious text to render a decision is WRONG and a dangerous precedent.

I hope this is overturned specifically on this point.

[cali]

3. Yeah, it's pretty shocking though I suspect

this judge is just a lone nut who doesn't belong on the bench.

[Tesha]

4. Ultimately, society is going to have to decide whether it values superstition.

Ultimately, society is going to have to decide whether or
not it values superstition over rationale, reasonable
thought.

We often hear folks saying that religious fantasies must
be "valued", but this case shows EXACTLY what's wrong
with that idea. Do you value the fantasies of the Christian
Scientists who allow their kids to die because the parents'
religion doesn't allow medical treatment? Do you value the
fantasies of the Moroccan guy whose religion allows him
to beat/maim/murder his wife? Or do you just value the
fantasies of people who go around believing that some
sky god tells them what to do and will grade them after
death?

All religion is fantasy and the sooner we're done with it,
the better off we'll be.

Tesha

[cali]

5. Whether any religious doctrine is true or false is not the point

religious doctrine should not guide any legal decision.

[Tesha]

10. Why not?

Why not? If I claimed, for example, that my religion
allows me to smoke Peyote, doesn't our constitution's
protections about the free exercise of my religion
extend that far? (There's some precedent that it may.)

And if we go that far, then why not recognize, for
example, the "rule of thumb"? After all, it's in the
Bible!

We already do allow religion to perturb our
legal decisions; it's just a question of how far down
that slippery slope we allow things to slide.

Tesha

[Casper Alabaster]

7. Shouldn't Western people stay out of this?

Yes, the individual case is sad, but the overall principle is correct.
Europeans do not have the 'latitude' to confront their former enemies, as they burned up all their beliefs whilst burning bodies on funeral pyres; Europeans are now incapable of rendering decisions in this regard.
Europeans are further enjoined from speaking freely of their collective shame.
Europeans will submit to Islam, and Americans too, or else...

[Odin2005]

8. I sure hope this post is sarcasm.

[cali]

11. Cute. real cute

I predict your stay here will be short.

[Odin2005]

9. I'm getting sick of cultural relativist crap like this.