Skip to footer

'Honor killings' in Canada: 5 responses to the Shafia verdict

Here are five opinions and editorials published in Canadian news outlets after the guilty verdict, which carried a sentence of life in prison with no parole for 25 years.

3. Wider questions on immigration policy in Canada

  • By Whitney Eulich Staff Writer

Opinion Editorial, The Globe and Mail, Sheema Khan

 “The Shafia trial raises wider questions about our immigration policy.

Tooba Yayha [the step-mother of three of the victims] denied ever hearing the term 'honour killing'. Yet, her older sister, Sorayah, approved killing for the sake of honour, telling La Presse’s Michèle Ouimet in Kabul that 'if someone committed a shameful act, they deserved to be eliminated'. Her son agreed, adding 'Afghans are right to kill in the name of honour.' Her husband added that if his daughters dared to ruin his honour, he would 'put them in a sack, and eliminate them so that no one could find a trace of them.' Clearly, there are some who are unapologetic, standing firmly behind such a heinous practice. Of these, a few migrate with such pathological thinking, unwilling to change.

Yet, the majority of immigrants arrive with the desire to build a better future. Yet, are they fully aware of the differences between their traditional culture and the freedoms afforded by a liberal democratic society? Are they willing to accept the reality that their children will be influenced by the host culture? What are we doing to educate potential immigrants about these fundamental differences?”

3 of 5
Mark Sappenfield
Editor

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

Subscribe to insightful journalism

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.