I Could Not Love Thee Dear So Much, Lov’D I Not Honour More.

[sandyRoe]

How could this chap have got his priorities so wrong>


http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/man-lets-daughter-drown-rather-than-let-strange-men-touch-her/ar-BBlD5LS

[aelmpvw]

i'm just a simple soul so i fail to understand how one man can prevent two free running lifeguards from doing their job?

[trt]

## Was this bloke a Muslim?

Serious question. If anyone has a link confirming this, then please post. ##

sp, did you not see the link?

[Hypognosis]

@sp1814

Well the irony appears to be that this bloke either didn't know his Koran to the last letter or he knew it but misinterpreted that section which Andy helpfully quoted. (If it's a hadith, not main Koran, then excuse my ignorance).

The last line, about contact being okay, if non-sexual in intent, opens the door to any and all sincere lifesaving actions (by males).

We shall have to overlook the sexism inherent in implying that all rescuers are male but the (married) women are meant to be housebound anyway. They aren't young free and single for long, in their culture and they're supposed to be chaperoned everywhere, when they are let out.

We shall have to overlook the fact that letting her drown saves him having to pay her dowry. Serves him right for being a tightwad.

We shall also have to overlook the "all men are rapists" assumption at the root of this particular "thou shalt not".

[anotheoldgit]

andy-hughes

/// I see no evidence that anyone has made any excuse for this man's behaviour, based on his faith, or indeed anything else. ///

And neither did I see any evidence that anyone made excuses for this man's behaviour, so please if you would do not infer that I did.

I was simply addressing the Muslim apologists.

These are the one's who will systematically bring other matters into the argument i.e. the Christian faith or any other religions etc, rather than criticise anything to do with Islam or Muslims.

[naomi24]

Hypognosis //The last line, about contact being okay, if non-sexual in intent, opens the door to any and all sincere lifesaving actions (by males).//

… but only if “it is from on top of the clothing”.

Those in swimwear need not apply.

[Mamyalynne]

So,is it wrong to slate the man for his actions as a father without mentioning Islam as I have done?

[Hypognosis]

@AOG

A quibble too far, I think

------
Hypognosis

/// Sikhism has already been mentioned. Three more shouldn't be hard to find, for the subcontinent region. ///

To be fair to the apologists, it does only state that he was Asian, so it now makes it a lot easier for them for me to state that the description Asian cast a much larger net than just the subcontinent of India, it also includes China etc, etc.
-------

If I'm not mistaken, most Brits specify "Chinese", when they mean Chinese. We may even be equally specific about Malays, Burmese, Tibetan, Thai, Vietnamese. We may use "SE Asian" as a blanket expression for everything between Bangladesh and Borneo but still excluding China, Taiwan and Korea.

If I said someone was "Asiatic", you probably wouldn't think I was referring to someone from Bangalore, would you?

Asia, the continent is just too huge an area to have much use as a descriptor for where a person came from.

However, if Sandy's article is a verbatim transcription of something written by a Dubai journalist, possibly even translated from an Arabic original, then it is anyone's guess what Dubai'is use the word "Asian" to mean.

This is why historians are obliged to refer to original source material. Otherwise we are all at the mercy of translators.

[anotheoldgit]

sp1814

/// AOG

Define 'apologists'. ///

/// Just so I can understand what you mean. ///

/// I think I know, but I'm loathe to make an invalid assumption. ///

No need to publish your invalid assumptions sp, but just to put your mind at rest, I refer you to my 12.40 post.

[anotheoldgit]

Hypognosis

/// A quibble too far, I think ///

I wasn't criticising you personally, when I stated that being Asian was much more than being a national of the Indian sub continent.

If was my sarcastic attempt to give the Muslim apologists a much wider choice on which religion to pin the blame on, rather than just Islam.

Sorry if I gave the impression that I was simply being a geographic smart alec.

[Hypognosis]

@naomi

//… but only if “it is from on top of the clothing”. //

Oops. I missed that detail.

Worrying though. Legitimises all the bum-pinchers down at the bazaar, doesn't it? And worse, presumably.


//Those in swimwear need not apply. //

Last I recall, they were invited to remove themselves to the privacy of the beach. And I mean westerners - otherwise it wouldn't have got on the news.

[Hypognosis]

@AOG

Apology accepted. As you can see, pedantry is my Achilles' heel. :0

I had already invited him to name three religions, to create the required ambiguity but he declined. In fact, since he posted the passage at the heart of this, it seems he has acknowledged the assertion which was made.


Fair do's though: his point was only that Ratter spoke out with slim or no basis. He only had to post the same passage andy quoted for his assertion to stand up to scrutiny.

Score draw, I think.

[ludwig]

// How could this chap have got his priorities so wrong //

Religion.

[jno]

Hypognosis, the chances are if she was from a strict Muslim family that she was swimming in a burqa anyway (no wonder people get into trouble in the water, but that's what devout women wear). So any touching would indeed be outside the clothing.

[mushroom25]

of course, under al qadha wal qadar, there would be no point in rescuing her since she would have died at that moment anyway, irrespective of activity.

[andy-hughes]

youngmafbog - //And prat of the day goes to .......

AH, again.

Get your head out of your Jacksie mate. //

No need to be personal.

Insult my view point by all means, if you wish, but being offensive is not acceptable.

[sp1814]

AOG

I see - basically an apologist is someone who expands on a point by identifying similar behaviours in others, rather than agreeing with you.

Okay - I'm up to speed now.

Y'see, I thought this thread was about a particularly misguided individual. I wasn't aware that we were supposed to be indulging any particular point of view.

I must remember the word 'apologist' the next time we're debating Chelsea racists who refuse to allow, say, a black man to board metro lines.

Apologist.

Good word...

[sp1814]

youngmafbog

I'm sorry, but you cannot unilaterally decide who wins 'Prat of the Day'.

Surely there needs to be a judging panel (like X Factor or Eurovision), and an agreed scoring system.

You can't just blatter* andy_hughes


(To blatter: verb - to name a competition winner under dubious circumstances)