Australia: Taxpayer-funded study urges “sensitivity” to Muslim migrants who beat their wives

Australia: Taxpayer-funded study urges “sensitivity” to Muslim migrants who beat their wives, Jihad Watch, June 18, 2017

This problem may not be solved now, but it will have to be faced eventually, not just in Australia but in all non-Muslim countries: are Muslims allowed to break the law of the land in order to follow their religion, or is the law of the land paramount? Will wife-beating be legal or illegal, or legal if you’re Muslim but not if you’re not Muslims?

Such questions will determine whether or not free societies will survive.

“Australians should show ‘sensitivity’ to migrants whose cultures ‘don’t value women’s and child’s rights’ claims new domestic violence study,” by Tom Flanagan, Daily Mail Australia, June 16, 2017 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

A taxpayer funded study has made the audacious claim that Australians need to show ‘cultural sensitivity’ towards migrant men who physically abuse their wife and children.

The study conducted over a three year period was funded by the Australian Research Council and points out that some human rights affect migrants’ integration and ‘successful settlement in Australia’, specifically those in relation to women and children.

The study refers to some refugees claiming that these rights ‘contravene the cultural values, norms and mores’ of their ethnic groups, according to The Daily Telegraph.

Yet the study has faced strong resistance in the shape of federal Minister for Women Michaelia Cash who has stated Australia is categorically against family violence.

‘Violence against women is unacceptable in any circumstances,’ Ms Cash told The Saturday Telegraph.

The study has however called for ‘cultural sensitivity and understanding of the impact on male refugees’ who suffer a sense of separation and an overwhelming feeling of disappointment when their views are repulsed by society.

The report did point out refugees’ appreciation for the factors of Australian life such as healthcare and education that were not available to them in their home nations, yet a ‘major point of contention’ was the differing views on women’s and children’s rights.

What was most upsetting for many refugees was the strong stance Australians had when it came to domestic violence.

It will be this Australian ethos that will repel the study’s findings with many in union with Prevention of Domestic Violence Minister Pru Goward who insists wife beaters must ‘change their ways.’

A recent example of the nation’s position on the matter was its reaction towards Sydney primary school teacher Reem Allouche telling the women’s arm of hardline political group Hizb ut-Tahrir that men are permitted to hit women with sticks….

Explore posts in the same categories: "Cultural sensitivity", Australia, Islam and females

Tags: , ,

You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

3 Comments on “Australia: Taxpayer-funded study urges “sensitivity” to Muslim migrants who beat their wives”

  1. Julia Lutch Says:

    The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights was drafted by representatives with different legal and cultural backgrounds from all regions of the world and set out international norms for fundamental human rights to be universally protected. But according to the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, signed in 1990 by more than fifty Muslim countries, sharia is the supreme arbiter of rights and freedoms in Islam because “fundamental rights and freedoms according to Islam are an integral part of the Islamic religion and that no one shall have the right as a matter of principle to abolish them either in whole or in part or to violate or ignore them in as much as they are binding divine command.”

    Crimes, punishments, the assuming of public office, and all rights and freedoms
    stipulated in the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam are subject to the divine dictates of sharia, which is held to be superior to man-made laws.

    Here are examples from the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam:
    ARTICLE 19: (d) 
    There shall be no crime or punishment except as provided for in the Shari’ah.
    ARTICLE 23 (b):
    Everyone…shall also have the right to assume public office in accordance with the provisions of Shari’ah.
    ARTICLE 24: All the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic Shari’ah.
    ARTICLE 25: The Islamic Shari’ah is the only source of reference for the explanation or clarification of any of the articles of this Declaration.

    The March Against Shariah was misleadingly characterized as “anti-Muslim bigotry.”  If Muslims living in Western nation feel that Islamic sharia supercedes human rights determined by international norms, and insist that Western nations with Muslim populations accede to a dual legal system, then Western nations potentially face politically disastrous consequences. 

    The Islamic Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Islamic Republic of Iran have chosen sharia over the protection of human rights defined in the 1948 Universal Declaration. However it is absolutely essential and in no way “Islamophobic ” for Western nations to require all their citizens to abide by man-made, constitutionally-based laws that do not admit the supremacy of sharia or any other religious basis for ultimate authority. 

    Texas Governor Greg Abbott is leading the way, recently signed into law House Bill 45, known as “American Laws for American Courts.” It prohibits the use of any foreign law in the state’s courts, specifically in family cases that involve marriage or parent-child relationship matters. 

    Under no circumstances can we allow the concept of equal rights for all Americans to be undermined.

    • joopklepzeiker Says:

      quote : Under no circumstances can we allow the concept of equal rights for all Americans to be undermined.

      Can not agree more , but is it not already happening , losing equal rights ?

  2. Richard D. Wilkins Says:

    Sharia law, to its shame, may permit wife-beating but it surely doesn’t positively mandate that. As such, Australian laws against domestic violence, expressive of societal disdain, must be enforced. There obviously can be instances where domestic legislation may improperly impinge on deeply held religious beliefs and practices, but this certainly could not be considered one of them.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s