Indian May Lose Eye for Blinding Saudi During Fight
Uh.. since when is the “eye for an eye” rule taken literally? Are they actually going to do this? How do you gouge someone’s eye out?
Re: An eye for an eye?
TDW: You didn't have to bring "Indian" thingie in equation, this is how "expats" are treated when a 'victim' is a Saudi all "shariah" laws become applicable, but when victim is non-Saudi and culprit a Saudi laws become less applicable and if that Saudi happens to be from Royal family..... laws become as "royal" as they can.
Re: An eye for an eye?
Logistics aside, are you disagreeing with the punishment, per se?
Re: An eye for an eye?
I didn’t try to purposely bring the “Indian” thing into the equation, that is the headline in the newspaper.
Re: An eye for an eye?
yes. What kind of a punishment is that? Is that a deterrent so that next time a person gets into a fight, he keeps his punches away from the eye?
Do they break a tooth for every tooth that you break?
Re: An eye for an eye?
^
KiouN, aap ko Dandaan shikan jawaab saY allergy hai :P ?
Re: An eye for an eye?
Are you more of a fine/jail person? What about death penalty? Thats also an extension of eye-for-an-eye principle.
Re: An eye for an eye?
yes I am more of a fine/jail person. I am also a legs man 
Re: An eye for an eye?
No need to bring unnecessary perversion in a discussion. Many people oppose death penalty on principle, as they believe no human has a right to take another human's life, or that death penalty is irreversible, and evidence used to convict a person can be faulty. And there are many compelling reasons for allowing death penalty. I guess the logistics of implementing taking an eye can be gruesome, but the actual penalty could be supported by divine text. And I presume, thats what the court in KSA used.
Re: An eye for an eye?
makes the world blind
Re: An eye for an eye?
^ blind, yes, but safer. I am a strong advocate of eye-for-an eye punishment when the damage imparted is irreparable and irreversible (with some exceptions). Rape is an exception -- if proven gulity, the rapist should be hanged, not raped.
Critics who vehemently argue against the death penalty in the US, claim that the instituition of death penalty has never acted as a deterrent to crime. To prove thier case, they show that crime rates of states that have death penalty instituted are no better than the states that dont have it. So, what happened?
The Islamic (or cultural) practice of punishing a criminal in public (stoning, lashing, hanging), labeled as "barbaric" by every westerner--even by the avid proponents of capital punishment-- has its tremendous advantage as a visual deterrent for the potential criminals. It is one thing for a potential rapist to read the news of death of a convicted rapist by lethal injection in the confines of a small room screened from public eye, and quite another to atually go to Times Square and see him get publicly hanged. Pleasant? No. Politically correct? No. Effective as a deterrence to crime? yes, of course.
Re: An eye for an eye?
TDW is a trouble maker. I always confused him with umer.ashraf. Where is that guy? Havent seen him posting lately.