Should honor killings be legal in the US because of the First Amendment?

[phk]

Should honor killings be legal in the US because of the First Amendment?

[A18]

Explain.

[John Dibble]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor_killing

Hell no, it has nothing to do with speech, the press, and if it involves religion it's not protected because it's forcing it on others.

[phk]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor_killing

Hell no, it has nothing to do with speech, the press, and if it involves religion it's not protected because it's forcing it on others.

It is an integral part of the Islamic religon.

[John Dibble]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor_killing

Hell no, it has nothing to do with speech, the press, and if it involves religion it's not protected because it's forcing it on others.

It is an integral part of the Islamic religon.

So? The first amendment grants freedom of religion - the freedom to believe what you want. It does not grant you the right to force your religious practices on other people.

[phk]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor_killing

Hell no, it has nothing to do with speech, the press, and if it involves religion it's not protected because it's forcing it on others.

It is an integral part of the Islamic religon.

So? The first amendment grants freedom of religion - the freedom to believe what you want. It does not grant you the right to force your religious practices on other people.

Its about Muslim men killing Muslim women who dishonor thier family, not forcing Islam on anybody.

[A18]

No, and you should see Employment Division v. Smith.

[YRABNNRM]

It's removing a citizen's rights obviously.

[John Dibble]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor_killing

Hell no, it has nothing to do with speech, the press, and if it involves religion it's not protected because it's forcing it on others.

It is an integral part of the Islamic religon.

So? The first amendment grants freedom of religion - the freedom to believe what you want. It does not grant you the right to force your religious practices on other people.

Its about Muslim men killing Muslim women who dishonor thier family, not forcing Islam on anybody.

Don't be stupid - I seriously doubt the Muslim women consent to be killed.

[phk]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honor_killing

Hell no, it has nothing to do with speech, the press, and if it involves religion it's not protected because it's forcing it on others.

It is an integral part of the Islamic religon.

So? The first amendment grants freedom of religion - the freedom to believe what you want. It does not grant you the right to force your religious practices on other people.

Its about Muslim men killing Muslim women who dishonor thier family, not forcing Islam on anybody.

Don't be stupid - I seriously doubt the Muslim women consent to be killed.

But its thier freedom for Muslim males to freely practice thier religon.

[John Dibble]

But its thier freedom for Muslim males to freely practice thier religon.

Are you drunk or high on something?

[Gustaf]

I'm sure the right to one's own life is ensured by some other part of the constitution and overrides...one could argue though that if someone willingly consents to involving herself in a society/religion with certain rules and then break them, then they have to pay the consequences (like if you rent a movie and doesn't give it back in time and has to pay a fee, or something).

But pledging away your life obviously isn't legal in most countries...

[phk]

But its thier freedom for Muslim males to freely practice thier religon.

Are you drunk or high on something?

Freedom of Religon trumps human rights.

[John Dibble]

But its thier freedom for Muslim males to freely practice thier religon.

Are you drunk or high on something?

Freedom of Religon trumps human rights.

We all know you dislike Islam, ok!

Slander and libel aren't protected speech under the first amendment because it involves tangible harm to an unwilling victim. For the same reason, religious practices like honor killings and human sacrifice are also not protected and are illegal. Happy now?

[A18]

I'm sure the right to one's own life is ensured by some other part of the constitution...

No, it isn't.

However, free exercise does not excuse a person from a neutral law of general applicability.

[opebo]

No, but you raise a good point, phnkrocket.

Religious families should not be allowed to have control over their members - for example the parents over the children, or the husband over the wife.  Membership in a religious cult which advocates child abuse and woman-abuse should be 1) grounds for removal of any children by DFS, 2) grounds to investigate the wife's autonomy and physical and mental well being, 3) evidence for 'hate-crime' prosecution if anything happens to her or the children.

[MasterJedi]

No

[Everett]

Where the hell did you come up with the conclusion that murder is protected under the First Amendment?

[phk]

Where the hell did you come up with the conclusion that murder is protected under the First Amendment?

Because it is an integral part of religion and thus the freedom to practice religion is given by the first amendment.

[Everett]

Where the hell did you come up with the conclusion that murder is protected under the First Amendment?

Because it is an integral part of religion and thus the freedom to practice religion is given by the first amendment.

So what do you propose, removing it?

[Dr. Cynic]

The constitution grants freedom of religon, but that includes freedom from religon. Honor killing involves more than one singular person, thus nulling the freedom of, and granting the freedom from.

[phk]

Where the hell did you come up with the conclusion that murder is protected under the First Amendment?

Because it is an integral part of religion and thus the freedom to practice religion is given by the first amendment.

So what do you propose, removing it?

Freedom of Religion should be limited.

[Dr. Cynic]

What about freedom from religon, it's the same thing. I absolutely agree with Opebo's argument.

[Citizen James]

But its thier freedom for Muslim males to freely practice thier religon.

Are you drunk or high on something?

Freedom of Religon trumps human rights.

So, by your "logic" slavery should be legal because it is mentioned in the Bible?

And killing people for various reasons such as working on Saturday should be legal because they are also mentioned in the Bible?

And though I am no expert on Islam, since you say it is critical to the faith, which of the five pillars of Islam would you consider that to be - faith, prayer, charity, fasting, or pilgramage?

[Gabu]

Where the hell did you come up with the conclusion that murder is protected under the First Amendment?

Because it is an integral part of religion and thus the freedom to practice religion is given by the first amendment.

The fifth amendment says, "No person shall ... be deprived of life ... without due process of law."

In plain language, it says, "killing someone is not okay unless the person is sentenced to death in a court of law."

Both the first and the fifth amendment exist in the Constitution; therefore, one is obligated to develop an interpretation of the Constitution in which these two can coexist.  The only interpretation that satisfies this is that which says that the First Amendment's allowance of the "free exercise of religion" does not include passages that require killing someone else.

So no, honor killings should not be legal.