The Curse of Barbaric Culture and Religion

From Quora:
*********************************
On December 4, 1829, the winter sun hung low over Calcutta as a quiet revolution unfolded—not with muskets or barricades, but with a stroke of the pen. Lord William Bentinck, Governor-General of British India, signed Regulation XVII, abolishing the ancient practice of sati, the ritual immolation of Hindu widows upon their husbands’ funeral pyres. For centuries it had lingered in pockets of the subcontinent: a widow, often scarcely more than a girl, drugged or coerced, bound to the timber and swallowed by flame while priests chanted and crowds looked on. Travelers wrote of the screams; Indian reformers like Rammohan Roy begged for intervention.

And now, at last, the ban had come. The decree stirred fury among some Indian leaders, who insisted that custom was sacred, that outsiders had no right to interfere with the rituals of their civilization. But when Hindu priests confronted British General Charles James Napier, demanding the right to continue the practice in his jurisdiction, he delivered the most uncompromising reply ever uttered by a British officer in India. He listened patiently to their arguments, then said: “Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs.” The priests withdrew. No pyre was lit. Napier’s words—cold as a saber’s edge—cut through the fog of cultural excuses and stand as a reminder that morality does not bow simply because tradition demands it.

It is fashionable today to say that all cultures must be understood on their own terms, that judgment is arrogance, that one civilization must never criticize another. But sati was not a dance, a festival, or a dialect—it was the burning alive of a human being. And in our own age there are practices just as cruel, wrapped in the same protective cloak of “culture”: the forced genital cutting of young girls in parts of Africa and the Middle East; the Taliban’s brutal confinement of Afghan women; so-called “honor killings” in South Asia and the Levant; child brides in rural Yemen and northern Nigeria. These are not quaint customs. They are wounds inflicted on the defenseless—acts of domination masquerading as heritage. Napier understood what too few modern voices dare say aloud: that respect for cultures does not require surrender to barbarism.

On this day, December 4, 1829, the British ban on sati did not eradicate every immolation. But it marked a turning point—a moment when a government, imperfect as all governments are, drew a line and said: No more. And perhaps that is the lesson worth carrying forward. Admire the beauty and diversity of civilizations, yes—but never let reverence for culture smother the duty to protect the vulnerable. In the contest between tradition and the life of an individual, civilization stands or falls on the side it chooses.
*****************************************

The post that was quoted here has been removed

The post that was quoted here has been removed

The post that was quoted here has been removed

The post that was quoted here has been removed

@Indonesia-Phil said
I'd like to second that, but in the absence of that I'd live with the cessation of weird and unnatural practices, like the celibacy of Catholic priests, and Muslim women having to cover their heads. I'm prepared to be corrected, but I don't think there's anything in the Bible or Koran which says that any of that has to happen. These are man - made practices (and I use ...[text shortened]... throwing themselves onto funeral pyres, the less of that kind of thing which goes on the better....

@Rajk999 said
Just like sonhouse, you did not appear to read the opening post. This thread is about both culture and religion, as they tend to influence each other. Widows did not throw themselves on to the fire. They were drugged or forced. Also celibacy and womens clothes are not the issue. The issue is killing, or damaging permanently innocent people. In what world do you live tha ...[text shortened]... e religious communities all over the world who are peaceful, docile and harmless, is really extreme.

@Rajk999 said
Just like sonhouse, you did not appear to read the opening post. This thread is about both culture and religion, as they tend to influence each other. Widows did not throw themselves on to the fire. They were drugged or forced. Also celibacy and womens clothes are not the issue. The issue is killing, or damaging permanently innocent people. In what world do you live tha ...[text shortened]... e religious communities all over the world who are peaceful, docile and harmless, is really extreme.

@Rajk999 said


Islam is the only dangerous religion in the world, and your attempt to equate these monsters with the rest of the religious communities all over the world who are peaceful, docile and harmless, is really extreme.

@kmax87 said
So apparently the troubles in Northern Ireland was due to Islam?

@Rajk999 said
Many states have wars and problems. It is only in Islam this war, fighting, killing of unbelievers, these atrocities are condoned in the Holy Books.

@kmax87 said
Well generational fighting and blood fueds go on forever. No religion required.

@Rajk999 said
I dont know about forever. In the case of Northern Ireland it lasted about 30 years. What lasts forever is when the violence and killing is commanded by the religion. You keep trying to equate the rest of the peaceful world with the murderous doctrine of Islam. You cannot fool people with that nonsense.