Nigerian Mother Loses Appeal Against Stoning Death
:(:(
An Islamic court in northern Nigeria ruled Monday that a woman must face death by stoning according to Muslim law for having a child outside marriage
Okay Who agrees that this is the right thing to do?
hmm...
Its weird considering the fact that Quran orders adulterers to be whipped 100 times (24:2), and not stoned.
Re: hmm...
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by aMiGo: *
Its weird considering the fact that Quran orders adulterers to be whipped 100 times (24:2), and not stoned.
[/QUOTE]
You are kidding right? good grief!!
It's an old debate.. those who follow scholars introduce extra qur'anic evidence and insist that it be followed instead of the Qur'an and that it still doesn't in anyway add or change what's in the Qur'an.
The idiocy of some people... and the horde of lemmings who follow them
[43:21] Or have We given them a book before it so that they hold fast to it?
[43:22] Nay! they say: We found our fathers on a course, and surely we are guided by their footsteps
Sex is an individual's personal business. Religion has no place to issue decrees on it. I cannot imagine a law so despicable as this one to be enforced so blindly that it takes away any sense of right and wrong. Either that or the ones who enforce it do so to satisfy their primitive animal instincts of hunt, replaced by modern day urges to devise somthing like this.
This issue should not be even worth a debate centering on what a religion mandates and what it doesn't. It seems to me that when you start taking scripture literally, you have forgotten that it was written eons ago and certain things are cultural attributes while other religious.
My point is not about whether or not this law is right or wrong, mandated by religion or an addition later on. I am not a fan of this law, but I have a question
Here is a simple question...if you know a law exists, whether you like it or not, whether you believ it is fair or not..do you just go around breaking it and then expect the punishment to be different.
I disagree with many laws, but I dont break them, or I try to support movements that seek adjustment to the laws
you may not like laws, but unless you rise up against laws, learn to live with them or leave the place where the laws exist that you dont like..you have only one choice left..to face the punishment.
I dont like this law, but then this law does not affect me. This law affects this woman, that is what this woman is facing.. like it or not there was a law there..she broke it..and ignorance is not an excuse (to copy a generic statement for every cop who pulls you over based on some law you were not even aware of)
Fraudz: Not all laws are just. In the Sharia system, are there provisions fo ryou to amend the laws or declare them unconstitutional? The entire concept of the sharia is anachronistic with little room for interpretation. I guess according to your logic, people should just abide even if they don't believe with the laws, since they have no ability to question the validity of it.
Re: Re: hmm…
There are certain people in this world who have culminated through these acts of indecency … they will be shocked to listen to such harsh punishments being given to there family.
regards to u know who :hula:
Fraudz..it is not that simple. Not everyone has the luxury of packing up and leaving the place where they don’t like the Law. Some laws are just assbackward and are meant to be broken. This Law is one of them.
This was a consensual sex, in the privacy of one’s home. Laws that regulate people’s lives should be made by people and not some 1420-yr. old scripture. The sad thing is that people don’t even know what is Lawful and what is not Lawful in many such places in the world.
It is wonderful that this news has attracted such attention. It exposes the illest side of some societies. They are going to stone her to death, and there is no news about the guy who was equal partner in this heinous crime. Go figure.
You know, I wondered about the same thing. When I read the news, I searched whole BBC site on related links but couldn't find any reference to the male partner of the act.
Ny whereas I agree that some laws just need to be changed..while theya re in effect if you break em, you get the punishment. And yes you may not have the luxury to leave, but you do have the ability to either not break the law, or to not get caught..
I am also inquisitive about the other person involved here..he somehow escaped any punishment.
does anyone have any more details of the case.
Fraudz you are correct in that ignorance is not bliss. Particularly in this case. But in this particular system, who decrees the punishment. If it a 1300yr old book then we are all in a bit of trouble.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Roman: *
You know, I wondered about the same thing. When I read the news, I searched whole BBC site on related links but couldn't find any reference to the male partner of the act.
[/QUOTE]
I did read about the 'male side' of this, but unfortunately I cannot remember the URL. He was let off because he denied and there are no witnesses. This is despite that lot of the villagers knew of the "affair".
That's interesting, if the villagers knew about the adultery they should at least get their eyes poked out or something. Don't you think?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Fraudz: *
Ny whereas I agree that some laws just need to be changed..while theya re in effect if you break em, you get the punishment. And yes you may not have the luxury to leave, but you do have the ability to either not break the law, or to not get caught..
I am also inquisitive about the other person involved here..he somehow escaped any punishment.
does anyone have any more details of the case.
[/QUOTE]
Pir Sahib, the problem begins as I am informed by my cousins in Pakistan when shameless hypocraits proclaim themselves to be genuine scholars and start issuing "fatwas" that are to be treated as laws. Then they rile up other ignoramuses and go on a stoning frenzy. The more ignorant the lot, the more power the fatwa givers have.
Fraudia, I'm still unable to understand what it is that you are supporting here? Any mindless and fearful submission (what you call, "don't break them") to totalitarian laws like this one in itself an unconditional support. Any argument to the contrary undermines the brutality of such laws.
Old Lahori, how about the DNA test? Did anybody think of that to indict the guy?
Roman
I think I clarified that I do not like this situation or this law. The point is simple..oppose the law, speak up against the law, but if you break the law and are caught, sadly you will face the penalty.
there is a difference between opposition to such laws, or breaking such laws. you can oppose laws without breaking them..and that would not be submission to totalitarian regimes.