Here is the link to the story: http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=8303567&page=1
And a link to her heartbreaking plea for help: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0P5IaIE_LI
This is a courageous and strong-willed young girl who is in very real danger. Let’s spread the word about her story and make sure she isn’t the latest victim of Islamic honor killings in this country.
That is horrible
That is horrible
I’m horrified that we permit this to happen in our country but the truth is that in many of these immigrant communities these honor killings do occur for all number of reasons. I wish that the government would crack down on it and really protect individuals in this country. But unfortunately the police are not very good at protective or preventative activity anyhow, mostly just cleaning up the mess afterwards. We don’t even seem to be able to protect women from abusive boyfriends very well, let alone homicidal Muslim families. Just a few months ago in my own town here a guy went off and killed both his ex-girlfriend and her new boyfriend.
Protecting people from murderous animals is practically the most important purpose of government yet they fall so short.
I’m horrified that we permit this to happen in our country but the truth is that in many of these immigrant communities these honor killings do occur for all number of reasons. I wish that the government would crack down on it and really protect individuals in this country. But unfortunately the police are not very good at protective or preventative activity anyhow, mostly just cleaning up the mess afterwards. We don’t even seem to be able to protect women from abusive boyfriends very well, let alone homicidal Muslim families. Just a few months ago in my own town here a guy went off and killed both his ex-girlfriend and her new boyfriend.
Protecting people from murderous animals is practically the most important purpose of government yet they fall so short.
I think I understand where you’re coming from, but there are a few points in your post that confuse me:
Murder is illegal in every state and county that I know of in the United States so I don’t think anyone in this country permits this.
You are absolutely correct that the police are not very good at protective or preventative activity. Many rights would need to be violated for police to be good at preventative activity. The government would allow no privacy to its citizens if it wanted to prevent crimes.
I don’t represent the opinion of Objectivism or anyone else on this forum when I say this because it only comes from my understanding: the government is not there to protect its citizens preemptively but to ensure justice is delivered after a crime is committed. The citizens of a country would need to protect themselves anyway no matter how much the government infringed on their rights in an attempt to protect them.
There are already many channels people can go through if they are the victims of domestic abuse in any form that range from police action to charity work. If people are careful about who they associate with, are prepared to defend themselves, and use the proper channels in law enforcement when necessary then they are quite safe from domestic abuse in any form. This obviously does not protect them from random crime from strangers but there are many ways to lower your odds of being a victim though that is not the current discussion.
I don’t mean to in any way “call you out” but I know it can be disheartening reading stories like this. I just want to reassure you that there are many ways people can protect themselves in the United States. There are many things wrong with the government the way it is now but law enforcement does get some things done right.
I don’t represent the opinion of Objectivism or anyone else on this forum when I say this because it only comes from my understanding: the government is not there to protect its citizens preemptively but to ensure justice is delivered after a crime is committed. The citizens of a country would need to protect themselves anyway no matter how much the government infringed on their rights in an attempt to protect them.
That’s not an opinion, it is a factual statement. And it’s wrong, the government does exist to protect its citizens from harm. Pre-emptively, if there’s objective evidence that someone is trying to murder another person.
But you are right about murder being illegal, and the Police will likely do a much better job of protecting this girl than we could ever do, and the Police are also likely better than we are, or ABC News is, at assessing the actual threat to this girls life.
There are millions of Muslims in the US, and honor killings are very rare, so if we were to only rely on the general fact that sometimes Muslims commit honor killings, this girl is in very little danger. But, of course, I’m not a Police officer who’s job it is to assess the actual danger, based on the actual facts of this case, not based on general statistics about Muslims.
So my answer to your request, Myself, is No. I will not help this girl because it would be wrong for me to assume she truly is in danger based on nothing but speculations, in an ABC article. I’m not going to believe what ABC employees say about healthcare, why would I believe they actually know the facts of this case. If she’s in danger, I trust the Police will protect her. (Though the fact that she starts out by repeating she’s a Christian, and wants to worship Jesus, tells me she’s probably a fanatical Christian, and I don’t trust her judgement. No further evidence, except her judgement, has been presented that her father actually wants to kill her.)
I’d err on the side of helping her and assuming she is right. If I were in a position to help her, I would help her until further evidence came to light. There is always the chance she is misidentifying the situation or that she is lying, because the process of discovering the facts isn’t always instantaneous, but if what she is saying is true, she should be protected. To be sure, the police are your best bet in such a case, so it’d be a good idea to notify them.
Fact: Her parents would never admit that they are going to kill her.
Fact: By the nature of this case, it is impossible for there to be any evidence that her life is in danger. It is simply her word against her relatives’.
Fact: Her relatives subscribe to a dangerous, violent cult that has a history of driving people to murder in this exact circumstance.
Fact: Cultural relativism is the driving force behind the denial of this obvious fact. People want to send this girl to be possibly slaughtered to attempt prove a point.
Fact: Parents do not have the right to hold “children” hostage in a hostile environment, as though they are property, until the day they turn 18.
Fact: She’s 17 years old, and by any rational measure, old enough to stand on her own.
Fact: Her own independent judgment is worth more than any of your own damned opinions or the opinions of police officers.
Fact: Being forced to live in a home where you BELIEVE you will be murdered in your sleep is ABSOLUTELY INSANE and there is no way ANYONE can argue that it is in her interest.
Fact: Anyone who doesn’t see the absolute absurdity of sending her back, regardless of the results of any ‘investigation’, is guilty of advocating the most heinous kind of force.
That’s not an opinion, it is a factual statement. And it’s wrong, the government does exist to protect its citizens from harm. Pre-emptively, if there’s objective evidence that someone is trying to murder another person.
You’re absolutely right. That was a horrible phrasing error on my part. It was an over-generalization when I didn’t mean one.
I meant to say what you said but screwed it up pretty bad. When I meant people would need to take care of themselves I didn’t mean vigilante justice or simply there should be gun-toting citizens in an anarchist society. What I said probably did sound more like something bordering on anarchy and that’s not what I meant.
I don’t think that there’s anything wrong with protecting this girl at all. Like you said, the way it’s being reported, there is objective evidence she’s in danger and law enforcement should do its job of protecting her.
Thanks for clearing it up.
In this case, the legal system seems to have acted as one would hope it would. While her fears may well be unfounded, the various child protective services and judges routinely err on the side of caution, even to the extent of denying genuine parenting rights. So, in a case like this, I don’t see any doubt about the outcome unless there are other important facts that are not public. Add to that the fact that she’s 17 years old, and therefore almost an adult, and I cannot imagine that she’ll be made to go back to her parents unless she herself changes her mind. Basically, she needs no help, except from whatever foster family takes her in.
So, in a case like this, I don’t see any doubt about the outcome unless there are other important facts that are not public.
There are two problems I can see:
The court won’t take her fear of “honor killing” seriously, due to not wanting to appear prejudiced against Muslims, or out of ignorance.
She isn’t a US citizen. If she’s sent back to live with her parents and they send her back to Sri Lanka, she’d pretty much be dead. The US doesn’t have a good track record when it comes to “parental rights” and non-citizens. Anyone remember Elian Gonzalez?
Fact: Her parents would never admit that they are going to kill her.
Not fact. Future events based on people’s choices cannot, by definition, be considered facts.
Fact: By the nature of this case, it is impossible for there to be any evidence that her life is in danger. It is simply her word against her relatives’.
The only way to know facts is based on evidence. Your claim is the definition of mysticism, the belief in the existence of things that don’t have evidence that points to their existence.
Fact: Her relatives subscribe to a dangerous, violent cult that has a history of driving people to murder in this exact circumstance.
No, personifying a cult is not fact, it’s the opposite of fact, it is a metaphor. Nu cult, belief system, religion or any other abstraction has ever, in the history of the Universe, grown legs and arms and engaged in the killing of anything. Individuals did, specifically individuals who are not her relatives.
Fact: You are advocating for a war on ideas, because they are harmful. That is fascism.
Fact: Parents do not have the right to hold “children” hostage in a hostile environment, as though they are property, until the day they turn 18.
Fact: The girl is not a hostage, you have not presented any evidence that she is being treated as property (in fact your claim is that there could be no such evidence), so your fact is an irrelevant and mostly meaningless fact.
Fact: Her own independent judgment is worth more than any of your own damned opinions or the opinions of police officers.
Not fact, subjective, baseless opinion.
Fact: Being forced to live in a home where you BELIEVE you will be murdered in your sleep is ABSOLUTELY INSANE and there is no way ANYONE can argue that it is in her interest.
Not fact. The correct definition of insanity is fact. Any other ones, including this one, are not facts, but false statements. The second part is also not fact, anyone could argue anything: I won’t argue she should be sent back, but I could. That’s a fact.
Fact: Anyone who doesn’t see the absolute absurdity of sending her back, regardless of the results of any ‘investigation’, is guilty of advocating the most heinous kind of force.
Nope, not fact. I agree it would be wrong to send her back (not that there’s any evidence that anyone wants to send her anywhere), but I don’t think it would be the most heinous kind of force imaginable, and even if I did, it still would just be a value judgment on my part, not a fact.
Fact: you don’t know what the word fact means, and you don’t seem to know what this girl’s situation is, since you seem to think she’s being sent back to her parents by the government.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/09/14/florida.muslim.convert/
It appears after over a month of investigation, there is no proof of the matter at all that these parents are radicals who would indeed slaughter their daughter.
It would appear that the legal system is working as one would hope it would.
It is also pertinent to mention that the young lady is brainwashed by a Christian cult called the Global Revolution Church whose leader (which she met over Facebook.com) influenced her to run away because he believes in a coming war of Christians against Muslems.
(Whilst one could also argue that there is another cult called Sharia that demands legal killings of all apostates by stoning.)
I say allow the girl to be legally emancipated and let her make her own decisions, while protecting her rights.
It is also pertinent to mention that the young lady is brainwashed by a Christian cult called the Global Revolution Church whose leader (which she met over Facebook.com) influenced her to run away because he believes in a coming war of Christians against Muslems.
(Whilst one could also argue that there is another cult called Sharia that demands legal killings of all apostates by stoning.)
I say allow the girl to be legally emancipated and let her make her own decisions, while protecting her rights.
Seconded that. She ought to go where she needs to go in order to feel safe, provided that there are people there willing to take her in. She doesn’t come off as very rational, but the need to preserve one’s life is central and acting to achieve that is a reasonable aim even if done wrongheadedly. If she does discover some day that her parents are not the monsters she thinks they are, she will owe them a very big apology and then it is up to them if they want to have anything more to do with her.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRhCIxiY5OA
Further evidence this girl has pretty much just been brainwashed by a bunch of fundamentalist Christians. It would be quite horrible if it turned out these savages turned her against her parents, who might have very well been decent people.
Legally emancipate a kid who was “brainwashed” over the internet (or otherwise)? Doesn’t emancipation seek to establish a persons maturity and ability to stand alone in this world?
It would seem to me that this girl has already proven that she is not mature enough to be legally taken from the protection of her parents.
Kill the father.
Kill the father.
What??
What??
If one could be certain that the accusations are true, that is.