"Into" spilling children's blood?

It's that time of year for gruesome scenes in Lebanon like this:

IsraelDidThisToMySon.jpg

A victim of Israeli atrocities, perhaps?

I mean, why not? It looks like something Israel would have done, and we all know that Israel is the source of all the world's evil, so why not just admit the truth?

The Israelis routinely wound innocent babies, so why not that one? And the best thing about using that picture to depict Israeli atrocities is that no photoshopping is required!

OK, the above was satire, and in very bad taste. I am not accusing anyone of using that picture to depict Israeli atrocities or insinuate the blood libel stuff again, OK? I should learn not to be so cynical and distrustful of people. Let this be a moral lesson to me.

What the above does depict is a centuries-old religious tradition, in which fathers slice their children's heads open -- "for the sake of Hussein."

Fortunately, the ritual does not seem to be practiced in the United States.

It might be seen as carrying the First Amendment too far.

Some people might say that about the pictures in this post. But what the hell. As the Washington Post's headline says, "Some Shiite Children Are Into Bloody Rite."

Really? Is that what the kids are "into"? If you read the accounts, it looks like they're crying and trying to get away.

Lest anyone think that only sick right wing bloggers are interested in this macabre ritual, pictures of the quaint custom are getting quit a bit of mainstream circulation.

Lest anyone think that first picture depicted an Israeli victim, here's an earlier picture of the same baby with his proud dad:

Ashoura3.jpg

And lest I appear sexist in my portrayals, mommies are into the cutting edge action too:

Ashoura5.jpg


As the WaPo points out, the practice of bloodletting during the Ashura has been condemned by a number of Shiite clerics including the Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah.

Which means that Americans should feel free to condemn it too, without any fear of offending cultural sensitivities.

As for the First Amendment, it seems to me that if we can't scream "fire" in a crowded theater, we shouldn't be able to slice children's heads open in a crowded mosque -- or haul people up to the tops of pyramids to cut their hearts out. Heck, I wouldn't even allow religious wife beating.

I know I'm being intolerant of what people are "into," though. Maybe some sensitivity training is in order.

posted by Eric on 02.03.07 at 09:22 AM





TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/4544






Comments

How intolerant of you!! A little ritualistic wife beating is only done in the best interest of the woman receiving the beating. I'm too ignorant to link you, but check out Pete Singers recent op-ed in the
NYT through Keith Burgess-Jackson's website.

Eno   ·  February 3, 2007 10:19 AM

Interesting read about an appalling situation.

(I suppose Singer might object to the head cutting ritual if it were done to dogs, though.)

Eric Scheie   ·  February 3, 2007 11:07 AM

Progress is being made, Eric, bit by bit.
Two thousand and some years ago, kids in that corner of the world were being tossed into fiery ovens. It was what Moloch and Baal wanted. With that in mind, slicing your kiddywinks noggin is a trade up.
As Octavius famously remarked,"Festina lente". Of course, I wish we were making haste a little less slowly.

Justin

J. Case   ·  February 4, 2007 12:05 PM


March 2007
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail




Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives




Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits