Posted on 07/04/2007 1:43:16 PM PDT by wagglebee
BRASILIA, July 4, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A Brazilian university professor claimed that the practice of infanticide by indigenous tribes should be respected as a cultural practice, the Telegraph reports.
Dr. Erwin Frank, an anthropology professor at the Federal University of Roraima, Brazil, is quoted in the Telegraph as having defended the violent practice, saying, "This is their way of life and we should not judge them on the basis of our values. The difference between the cultures should be respected."
Certain tribes believe that some babies are "cursed" and therefore do not have souls. Such children include those with physical disabilities, females (or any children of an undesired gender), babies born to unwed mothers, twins or triplets. These "cursed" children are sometimes smothered by leaves, poisoned, buried alive by parents or simply left to die of exposure.
Dr. Marcos Pelegrinia, a doctor working in the Yanomami tribe district, stated that 98 children were killed by their mothers in 2004, the Telegraph reports.
The non-profit anti-infanticide campaign group Atini, also known as "Voice for Life", noted, however, that the exact number of annual infanticides cannot be pinpointed. Official agencies do not step in and stop the abuse for fear of meddling in local customs. As a result, the deaths of many babies are officially recorded as death by "malnutrition" or "undetermined causes."
The Brazilian couple that founded Atini, Marcia and Edson Suzuki, worked for over 20 years with the Suruwahara Indians in the Amazon Basin of Brazil. Mr. Suzuki described their mission, saying, "We are fighting against doctors and anthropologists who say we must not interfere with the culture of the people."
Referring to those who defend infanticide as part of a cultural tradition, Marcia Suzuki states on the Atini blog, "We respect the cultures and the differences, but above all we respect the human beings with no distinction."
At present, a new law that would abolish infanticide, called Muwaji's law, is being debated in the Brazilian Congress, states the Telegraph. The law is based upon the fundamental right to life that is sanctioned in both The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Brazilian Federal Consitution.
In an address to the President and Brazilian Congress this March, Mr. Henry Afonso defended the law, saying, "The practice of infanticide is not justified, however much anthropologists wish to defend tradition and cultural practices of certain peoples. The number of sacrificed children per year in this country is far from few; victims of a cultural practice that many times is more important than the most fundamental human instinct: Preserving life itself."
Read story by the Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/06...
Read full address to the Brazilian Congress on Muwaji's law:
http://voiceforlife.blogspot.com/2007/05/muwaji-honoured-in-...
Voice for Life blog:
http://voiceforlifewhoweare.blogspot.com/
This is exactly the reason there are Christian missionaries.
These folks are pagans. So is the anthropologist.
They are lost without any thought there is a God in Creation.
Moral relativism rears its ugly head like monster emerging from a swamp. Just because different cultures engage in certain practices, doesn’t mean that it is ok. When one believes in God, moral absolutes exist. These moral absolutes transcend all cultures, regardless of beliefs. The moral absolute is that it is wrong to kill children, even if they are disabled.
In the history of mankind, NO civilization has survived that did not protect its most defenseless members.
Happy Independence Day!
Tribal killing of anthropology professors should be even more respected.
I knew that, I just find it disturbing that there are FReepers who are not bothered by such barbarity.
Brazil, like all of South America and a lot of Mexico, is loaded with people of caucasian, European (Spain, Germany, Italy, Portugal, etc.) descent and surnames. You can meet a 2nd or 3rd-generation Brazilian with a name like "Irwin Frank" and be surprised to discover the person speaks only Portuguese, or perhaps Portuguese and German.
I have relatives who've by blood inherited decidedly Spanish last names, who are blond and blue-eyed. One of my family ancestors from Mexico a few generations back looks Mexican-indian "brown" in photos, but came from an established Mexican family with the surname "Smith." Not everyone south of the border is of indigenous brown native descent, and not everyone has last names like "Rodriguez" or "Lopez."
The only people I know with the surname Frank are jews.
Wow. Does this mean they don't have to believe in evolution?
Ah, the eighteenth century--rationalistic science and the "noble savage," united in perfect harmony against the Bible-thumpers!
However, this monster’s attitude is more in tune with Nazism, but you are probably correct.
Great point! Ah, the irony!
star trek federation policy does not allow any moral corruption of alien cultures.
(/s)
Probably the same FReepers who call Biblical Fundamentalists "savages."
It seems that "all cultures are equal" but some cultures are more equal than others.
What does "believing" have to do with it? They follow brutal heathen ways and kill their own, they'll eventually become extinct and/or easy conquests for smarter peoples, and will face the same fate as probably thousands of stone-age tribes on the planet in eons past.
Survival of the fittest for human beings is IN THE BIBLE. Follow -- or even attempt to follow -- the rules in the Bible, and humanity thrives. Societies that reject the bible's principles die; those that do embrace the bible, survive and thrive, as we've seen clearly demonstrated on this planet for the past 1,000 years. It's really the main reason why to me, evolution IS intelligent design and is true to Christianity and God. There is nothing in evolution that negates the bibles' validity, but quite a lot that validates it. God works His wonders in strange and mysterious ways.
Well, the law is a fine thing and all, but don’t expect it to cause any substantial changes in the practice in a single generation.
Look at some of the practices in India that are outlawed and how much they still go on.
But you do what you can and eventually begin to change the way these people think.
And when we rant about abortion in this country, we should realize that we are making real headway towards the goal. The public’s attitude(s) towards abortion has shifted considerably in our direction in the last decade or so. And will do so more as the truth is spread. That is what will get laws changed, is getting them changed now.
Did you mean to say "isn't" as opposed to "is", or do you think this is a good practice?
Sir Charles Napier: where are you when we need you...
When I read this article a quote by General Charles Napier of the British Army in India lept to mind. Back when Britain was running things there. From wiki:
A quote for which Napier is famous involves a delegation of Hindu locals approaching him and complaining about prohibition of Sati, often referred to at the time as suttee, by British authorities. This was the custom of burning widows alive on the funeral pyres of their husbands. The exact wording of his response varies somewhat in different reports, but the following version captures its essence:
“You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours.”
I didnt even see your reference to Napier when I posted mine. Jeeze.
Is it possible that someone's brain might come to the conclusion that murdering the weak and helpless is immoral? Would you argue that Aurelius Augustinus or Albert Schweitzer, for example, were "missing a brain"?
As for the second alternative, how exactly is the person who refuses to murder a defenseless child a coward, while the person who actually murders a defenseless child isn't?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.