Teenage Girl Stabbed For Converting Out of The Religion of Peace

[Bono]

www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,20560551-3102,00.html



Religion link to stabbing

Greg Stolz

October 11, 2006 12:00am
Article from: The Courier-Mail

Font size: + -

Send this article: Print Email

A RELIGIOUS feud between a Muslim father and his teenage daughter may have sparked a bloody domestic dispute on the Gold Coast which left the man's wife dead and him fighting for life in hospital.

Police are investigating suggestions the violence erupted after the 17-year-old girl told her father she wanted to opt out of the Islamic faith and convert to Christianity. The girl's mother is believed to have stepped in to protect her daughter, only to be fatally stabbed with a kitchen knife.

Neighbours reported hearing "blood-curdling" screams before the hysterical girl ran half-naked from their Southport home unit covered in scratches.

Police later found the body of the girl's mother, 41, inside the blood-smeared unit. Her husband was taken to the Gold Coast Hospital with a stab wound to the chest. He was last night in a critical condition under police guard.

Neighbour Caitlin Dalton was taking out the rubbish about 7pm on Monday when she heard "loud, huge, terrifying screams" coming from the unit complex.

"She (the teenager) was yelling, 'Help me, help me, they're trying to kill me'," Ms Dalton said. "Everybody heard the screams but we couldn't work out which unit they were coming from. Then this girl emerged in the stairwell hysterical and crying.

"Her clothes had been ripped off, she was just in her underwear and she had quite severe scratches down her arm and across her back."

Ms Dalton said that as residents tried to comfort the sobbing girl, she told how she had wanted to "convert from the Islam religion . . . and obviously her father didn't handle it very well".

"She said her parents were really strict," Ms Dalton said.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

According to Dibble, this only happens among Muslims in very backward places like Iran.

[John Dibble]

According to Dibble, this only happens among Muslims in very backward places like Iran.

Whe did I say it ONLY happens in such places? Heck, I don't even remember debating you on this particular subject - methinks you're thinking of someone else who objected to your generalizations. Maybe you want to look that up before you put words in my mouth. My opinion is that it's far less likely to happen with Muslims in this country, not that it's never happens. As a general rule Muslims in this country are more moderate than those in the Middle East, so I think that's a reasonable assessment.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Why do we even let them into western nations?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

How nice of you to ignore stuff like this, you hypocrites.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.atheistresource.co.uk/victims3.html

[Joe Republic]

How nice of you to ignore stuff like this, you hypocrites.

Whoops, it looks like we're all hypocrites for reading and responding to something that Bono posted from a leading Australian news source, while ignoring something you pulled up from "atheistresource.co.uk" at the same time.  However will we sleep at night?

Anyway, both crimes are equally heinous, jackass.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

How nice of you to ignore stuff like this, you hypocrites.

http://www.atheistresource.co.uk/victims3.html

Doesn't David Koresh get honorable mention?

[Platypus]

How nice of you to ignore stuff like this, you hypocrites.

Whoops, it looks like we're all hypocrites for reading and responding to something that Bono posted from a leading Australian news source, while ignoring something you pulled up from "atheistresource.co.uk" at the same time.  However will we sleep at night?

Anyway, both crimes are equally heinous, jackass.

Leading only in readership.

If it doesn't come from Fairfax or the Australian, I generally don't trust it. That said, if I already know about something and want to read up on it more, news ltd. is fine. Their primary problem is sensationalism.

[Joe Republic]

How nice of you to ignore stuff like this, you hypocrites.

Whoops, it looks like we're all hypocrites for reading and responding to something that Bono posted from a leading Australian news source, while ignoring something you pulled up from "atheistresource.co.uk" at the same time.  However will we sleep at night?

Anyway, both crimes are equally heinous, jackass.

Leading only in readership.

If it doesn't come from Fairfax or the Australian, I generally don't trust it. That said, if I already know about something and want to read up on it more, news ltd. is fine. Their primary problem is sensationalism.

My point was that 'news.com.au' is far more prevalent than 'atheistresource.co.uk'.  Of course we're more likely to "ignore" (as jfern put it) a story from the latter, since we're simply less likely to stumble upon it.

[Citizen James]

Good thing domestic violence never happens in Christian households.

Can you imagine the outroar if a Christian mother drowned her children in a bathtub or chopped off their arms.  Why you'ld never be able to call it a "religion of peace" again.

And as many young adults know, those raised in a hardcore Christian household are never threatened or disowned by their parents for leaving the faith; and I doubt it would be overly newsworthy even if they tried to beat some 'sense' into the wayward sheep.

I see two different groups - not Muslim and Christian, but tollerant and intollerant, and by extention peaceful and violent.

[Michael Z]

Good thing domestic violence never happens in Christian households.

Can you imagine the outroar if a Christian mother drowned her children in a bathtub or chopped off their arms.  Why you'ld never be able to call it a "religion of peace" again.

And as many young adults know, those raised in a hardcore Christian household are never threatened or disowned by their parents for leaving the faith; and I doubt it would be overly newsworthy even if they tried to beat some 'sense' into the wayward sheep.

I see two different groups - not Muslim and Christian, but tollerant and intollerant, and by extention peaceful and violent.

Well said.

[Bono]

Why you'ld never be able to call it a "religion of peace" again.

I don't see why you say "again", since I never did so. Jesus specifially siad he wasn't going to bring peace:

51"Do you suppose that I came to grant peace on earth? I tell you, no, but rather division;
52for from now on five members in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three.
53"They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law." Luke 12:51-53

[Ebowed]

51"Do you suppose that I came to grant peace on earth? I tell you, no, but rather division;
52for from now on five members in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three.
53"They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law." Luke 12:51-53

Heartwarming.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Good thing domestic violence never happens in Christian households.

Can you imagine the outroar if a Christian mother drowned her children in a bathtub or chopped off their arms.  Why you'ld never be able to call it a "religion of peace" again.

And as many young adults know, those raised in a hardcore Christian household are never threatened or disowned by their parents for leaving the faith; and I doubt it would be overly newsworthy even if they tried to beat some 'sense' into the wayward sheep.

I see two different groups - not Muslim and Christian, but tollerant and intollerant, and by extention peaceful and violent.

Of course, in your attempt to paint both religions equally violent and/or peaceful, you conveniently, probably because it refutes your argument, turn a blind eye to the fact that Christianity DOES NOT teach believers to kill apostates, yet Islam DOES.

So, you can lump Koresh and Yates together in an attempt to claim Christianity preaches violence, but you can’t point to any Christian teachings those whackos were following, for they were NOT following the teachings of Christ.

So, even though we have the examples of Koresh and Yates, they do not represent systematic teaching of violence within Christianity, for there is no record of Christ teaching violence.  In fact, Christ taught just the opposite.

On the other hand, all I have to do is point to the Shari'a, the Islamic Law, in order to prove that Muslims who kill Muslim apostates are simply following the teachings of their prophet Mohammad.  And they openly admit it.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

51"Do you suppose that I came to grant peace on earth? I tell you, no, but rather division;
52for from now on five members in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three.
53"They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law." Luke 12:51-53

Heartwarming.

Who is it that forms the divisions Jesus spoke about?  Did Jesus recoil from the world, or did the world recoil from him?

Christ didn’t persecute people.  To the contrary, he agreed to allow the world to crucify him, even though he was innocent.  Nor did he plead his innocence during his trail before Pilate, Caiaphas, and Herod; rather he remained silent and refused to answer the false charges the world brought against him.

Therefore, it is not the true followers of Christ who stir up dissension, rather it is those of the world who are offended and react violently to Christ!

[kashifsakhan]

Good thing domestic violence never happens in Christian households.

Can you imagine the outroar if a Christian mother drowned her children in a bathtub or chopped off their arms.  Why you'ld never be able to call it a "religion of peace" again.

And as many young adults know, those raised in a hardcore Christian household are never threatened or disowned by their parents for leaving the faith; and I doubt it would be overly newsworthy even if they tried to beat some 'sense' into the wayward sheep.

I see two different groups - not Muslim and Christian, but tollerant and intollerant, and by extention peaceful and violent.

If only people would realize that islam isnt actually a religion of hatred or violence. What you see on tv is just the most extreme fundamentalists of the religion, because lets be honest, it makes good television. Can u image how boring it would be to show moderate muslims who dont react with violence towards others? It would be kind of like a news story on Iraq which went along the lines of "tonight in baghdad, 1,000,000 people DID NOT die."

I think the reason why some people feel that islam is a religion of hate is because they dont fully understand the religion, and sort of get brain-washed by the stuff they see on television or over the internet. Its not really their fault, but it does happen.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The thing is, Islam was FOUNDED on violence. It's the only modern major religion I can think of that was, all others had peaceful founders.

Great quote from another forum on this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[kashifsakhan]

Actually, no it wasnt founded on violence. The original people who converted to islam converted because they agreed with the teachings of Muhammed, just like people converted to Christianity because they agreed with the teachings of Jesus.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

What lands did Jesus conquer by force?

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Christianity is useless. The pacifism, hatred of sex and general encouragement of medieval values are all bad things.

[Beet]

The thing is, Islam was FOUNDED on violence. It's the only modern major religion I can think of that was, all others had peaceful founders.

What about Judaism? In many ways the graphical genocide of the Canaanites (and the "firstborn" of Egypt; and the Flood; and Sodom and Gommorah, etc. etc.) depicted in the Old Testament is even worse than what Mohammed did.

[Jens]

The thing is, Islam was FOUNDED on violence. It's the only modern major religion I can think of that was, all others had peaceful founders.

Great quote from another forum on this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You cannot tell anything from this map.
First of all, it is nessesary to know that the beduins of Arabia had been in nearly constant warfare before they converted to Islam.
Second, the reason for the succes of the attacks under the first Caliphs, was the weakness of the Byzantine Empire and Sassanide Empire caused by a just finished war that left both Empires nearly powerless. The loss of the richest 3th of the empire was something Byzantium never got over, and that coupled with the extra power the Caliphate gained from conquering the Sassanides (Persia) and Egypt, made it impossible for Byzantium to defend Tunis and the remains of the North African possesions.
Third, the fall of the Visigoth Empire in the Iberian Peninsula was very swift again because of internal strife and the conquest of the Visigoths also marked the maximum expansion of the Caliphate. The empire was already at this time too enormous to govern and and the outer rim quickly became independent.
Fourth, and very important. The map of the Caliphate is not a religious map. Islam did not cover these areas. Places like Egypt and Syria had a large Christian population and when the crusaders arrived 400 years later, Palestine still had a large Christian minority.

[Bono]

The thing is, Islam was FOUNDED on violence. It's the only modern major religion I can think of that was, all others had peaceful founders.

Great quote from another forum on this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You cannot tell anything from this map.
First of all, it is nessesary to know that the beduins of Arabia had been in nearly constant warfare before they converted to Islam.
Second, the reason for the succes of the attacks under the first Caliphs, was the weakness of the Byzantine Empire and Sassanide Empire caused by a just finished war that left both Empires nearly powerless. The loss of the richest 3th of the empire was something Byzantium never got over, and that coupled with the extra power the Caliphate gained from conquering the Sassanides (Persia) and Egypt, made it impossible for Byzantium to defend Tunis and the remains of the North African possesions.
Third, the fall of the Visigoth Empire in the Iberian Peninsula was very swift again because of internal strife and the conquest of the Visigoths also marked the maximum expansion of the Caliphate. The empire was already at this time too enormous to govern and and the outer rim quickly became independent.
Fourth, and very important. The map of the Caliphate is not a religious map. Islam did not cover these areas. Places like Egypt and Syria had a large Christian population and when the crusaders arrived 400 years later, Palestine still had a large Christian minority.

Okay. How much did Jesus and the apostles invade?
Exactly.

[kashifsakhan]

The thing is, Islam was FOUNDED on violence. It's the only modern major religion I can think of that was, all others had peaceful founders.

Great quote from another forum on this:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You cannot tell anything from this map.
First of all, it is nessesary to know that the beduins of Arabia had been in nearly constant warfare before they converted to Islam.
Second, the reason for the succes of the attacks under the first Caliphs, was the weakness of the Byzantine Empire and Sassanide Empire caused by a just finished war that left both Empires nearly powerless. The loss of the richest 3th of the empire was something Byzantium never got over, and that coupled with the extra power the Caliphate gained from conquering the Sassanides (Persia) and Egypt, made it impossible for Byzantium to defend Tunis and the remains of the North African possesions.
Third, the fall of the Visigoth Empire in the Iberian Peninsula was very swift again because of internal strife and the conquest of the Visigoths also marked the maximum expansion of the Caliphate. The empire was already at this time too enormous to govern and and the outer rim quickly became independent.
Fourth, and very important. The map of the Caliphate is not a religious map. Islam did not cover these areas. Places like Egypt and Syria had a large Christian population and when the crusaders arrived 400 years later, Palestine still had a large Christian minority.

Okay. How much did Jesus and the apostles invade?
Exactly.

Jesus didnt get a chance did he? Perhaps if he wasnt cruxified the history of Christianity might have been different. There might have been a christian uprising against the roman empire which might have resulted in a few deaths.

You cant compare the two religions in those terms because they had very VERY different circumstances surrounding them.

[Rin-chan]

Irony!

Rin-chan