[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Fraudz: *
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.
.
[/QUOTE]
Fraudz how can one speak out against the law if the thekedars say it is divine and can cause a paradx for the religion. Please explain.
thanks,
CH
move your lips, and speak, use your hands and write...
so stand up against the thekdaydaars..whats going to happen, you may face severe punishments, you may be beaten, tortured, imprisoned, killed?
Many people have decided to stand up for their beliefs and their rights and have sacrificed a lot for it. Indians, Pakistanis, Libyans, Algerians..many paid for their freedom by blood.
If a nation is going to be so apathetic that they will not stand up to oppose the laws or regimes they so despise, then they should deal with what they are dealt. Outsiders can only help them so much..there has to be a movement or front on the inside that is opposing it too.
Yes, international pressure is fine. But eventually and ultimately the destiny of any nation or any group is in its own hands. they can choose to take charge..no matter what the cost..or they can just deal with it.
now on the issue of this law being draconian or unjust or inhumane, it maybe so, but did we just not execute someone in texas a few days back..is that not considered inhumane somewhere else? but we did it none the less..because that is our law, and until and unless it is changed it will be the law..like it or not. So lets just be on the safe side and not break it. Smoking pot is a crime..isnt there a whole movement to change that? but ppl who smoke pot, either dont get caught, or when they do get caught they are penalized based on whatever laws exist.
The ruling is just really sad. They did nothing wrong, and to think that some ppl want Sharia Law in Pakistan!
March forward those secularists.
Fraudz the Texas capital punishment was not ordained and prescribed by religious doctrine. It can be changed. Can you change the koran?
In fact let me go one further. Will you be willing to change the koran to make it compliant to modern muslim living?
Here are some more details.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/20/international/africa/20NIGE.html?pagewanted=print&position=top
August 20, 2002
Court Upholds Stoning for Nigerian Mother
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
UNTUA, Nigeria, Aug. 19 — An Islamic high court in northern Nigeria rejected an appeal today from a single mother sentenced to be stoned to death for having had sex out of wedlock.
The woman’s lawyers said they planned to file an appeal to a yet higher Islamic court. If that failed, they could appeal to the Supreme Court, where the case would force a showdown between Nigeria’s constitutional and religious authorities.
The introduction of Islamic law, or Shariah, in a dozen northern states has sparked clashes between the country’s Christians and Muslims.
In addition, President Olusegun Obasanjo’s government has declared the unconstitutionality of Shariah punishments like beheadings, stonings and amputations. But some predominantly Muslim northern states, which began instituting Shariah shortly after civilian rule replaced military dictatorship in 1999, have accused him of meddling.
In court today, Amin Lawal clutched her baby daughter and burst into tears as the judge ruled.
Ms. Lawal, 30, was first sentenced in March, having given birth to her daughter more than nine months after divorcing. The man she identified as the child’s father denied the accusation and was acquitted for lack of evidence last spring.
“We uphold the judgment from the lower court,” Judge Aliyu Abdullahi said today on behalf of four judges at the Islamic high court at Funtua, in Katsina State, in northern Nigeria.
Many of the 60 people who packed the small courtroom shouted, “God is great!” in the Hausa dialect, as Ms. Lawal wept.
The judges upheld the conviction on the ground that Ms. Laval admitted to having had sex outside marriage. But her legal team argued that she could not knowingly have made a confession because she did not understand the Arabic term for adultery, “zena.”
The judge said the sentence would be carried out as soon as Ms. Lawal weaned her daughter from breast-feeding. In June, the court postponed her execution until January 2004 for that reason. She was given 30 days to appeal the ruling and was then released on bail.
Outside the court today, Ms. Lawal hid behind her lawyer, holding her baby up to shield her face from photographers. About 20 police officers armed with tear gas stood guard at the court entrance, but there were no immediate reports of violence.
Ms. Lawal is the second Nigerian woman to be condemned to death by Islamic courts for sex out of wedlock. The first, Safiya Hussaini, had her sentence overturned in March on an appeal.
At least two other women have faced similar charges. One case was dismissed in January, and the other has been delayed until the woman is healthy enough to appear in court.
All the women are poor, uneducated, single mothers from rural villages.
Most spectators in court on Monday welcomed the ruling.
“This is a triumph of Allah’s law against the enemies of Shariah,” said Muhammad Radiu, 26, an Islamic studies student. “By this judgment, we are confident the government is serious about the implementation of Shariah.”
But church leaders and rights advocates were dismayed.
“The application of the Shariah is unconstitutional, and we must not tolerate it further,” John Olorunfemi Onaiyekan, Archbishop of Abuja, told the Italian-based missionary news service, Misna.
Amnesty International said in a statement in London that stoning people to death was “the ultimate form of torture” and that the “sentence should not be carried out.”
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Chaltahai: *
Fraudz the Texas capital punishment was not ordained and prescribed by religious doctrine. It can be changed. Can you change the koran?
In fact let me go one further. Will you be willing to change the koran to make it compliant to modern muslim living?
[/QUOTE]
The point still remains...as much as one hates the law..breaking it and getting caught is not the smartest thing to do. I would be concerned about what happened to the guy, or why is he not getting punished. Sadly if it is proven that she did indeed commit adultery, and this law exists, then as much as I am opposed to it..and as much as I can voice my voice against it, the fact remains that she broke a law fully knowing what the penalty was..or at the minimum should have known what the penalty was.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Fraudz: *
The point still remains...as much as one hates the law..breaking it and getting caught is not the smartest thing to do. I would be concerned about what happened to the guy, or why is he not getting punished. Sadly if it is proven that she did indeed commit adultery, and this law exists, then as much as I am opposed to it..and as much as I can voice my voice against it, the fact remains that she broke a law fully knowing what the penalty was..or at the minimum should have known what the penalty was.
[/QUOTE]
Fraudia,
You are equating this law with the existence of other civil laws. That's very much of a wrong analogy. By grouping it with any other laws for comparison you are submitting to the fact that if it has been made to the law, live under it and treat it like other laws to change it. Irony of this whole deal is that an average Muslim in any part of the world will most probably won't want that woman to be stoned and will even oppose such a law.
Now, I understand that you are basically making a very simple statement that "if it's a law, don't break it or you'll suffer the consequences" but I fail to see the substantiality or importance of this statement compared to the mind-boggling fact that a woman will be stoned by a herd of people and will die a miserable, slow death. Unless your emphasis is more on the fact that "this law exist, abide by it" THAN the condemnation of the situation itself, I fail to see what purpose such a simple statement will serve. And I sure don't agree with emphasizing the former to undermine the gravity of the latter. That's, in my opinion, is cruel disregard of what's the core of the issue here.
okay so aside from complaining about this punishment on this website what will you do to change that?
cry that its unfair everytime it happens.
the point is not to put up or shut up, but to get up and change it, put up or shut up. Thats not true only for her, but for all of us..
So why dont you go write a few letters to amnesty, Nigerian govt, US govt, UN..organize a protest. Sitting home and sayng something is wrong does not change it.
So why dont you go write a few letters to amnesty, Nigerian govt, US govt, UN..organize a protest. Sitting home and sayng something is wrong does not change it.
HaaN, see, now you're talking.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Roman: *
So why dont you go write a few letters to amnesty, Nigerian govt, US govt, UN..organize a protest. Sitting home and sayng something is wrong does not change it.
HaaN, see, now you're talking.
[/QUOTE]
exactly...and just going and breaking the law..as much as you hate it is foolish..
As much as I agree with you Pir Sahib, but lets talk about specific cases.
Here is the case of Ayub Masih acquitted after 6 years for breaking what law? In case you don’t remember the history: His dog won and that of his muslim opponents lost, and he was charged with blasphemy and his house taken over with the connivance of the local police. And now as a free man he is a walking target because someone will shoot him (remember they shot a blasphemer in a jail and the murderer was hailed as a hero). What law are you talking about? What Sharia? Sharia is who ever has the power to define it !
I am sorry I confused Ayub Masih with Aslam Masih. Ayub is the guy who had the idiocy to talk abut Salman Rushdies book. He wanted to know what the bruhaha was all about? Aslam Masih case is at
When the dog of a Christian wins…
During a dog race, the Christian Aslam Masih hung a good luck charm around his dog’s neck. It allegedly contained insults against the prophet Mohammed. Aslam was given two successive life sentences!
http://www.pakistanchristianpost.com/newsdetails.php?newsid=187
Ayub Masih acquitted by Supreme Court of Pakistan after six years under blasphemy.
By Robin Fernandez. PCP Karachi Bureau report.
ISLAMABAD: The apex court on Thursday acquitted a Christian youth on death row more than four years after he was convicted of blasphemy by a high court.
Ayub Masih, 31, had been living in prison for almost six years, although his sentencing was widely challenged by human rights groups, Christian clergymen and lay persons. Within nine days of Masih’s sentencing on April 27, 1998, Catholic Bishop of Faisalabad John Joseph committed suicide to protest the verdict and force the government to repeal the blasphemy laws–a demand that continues to resonate among Pakistan’s religious minorities.
Senior lawyer Abid Hasan Minto on behalf of Ayub Masih in response to a second appeal filed Thursday’s ruling, passed by a three-member bench of the court. The first appeal heard a little over the Multan bench of the Lahore High Court dismissed a year ago.
Human rights activists say Masih would need protection of the law even though he is now a free man. “Ayub cannot live a normal life because his accuser and all those who support him are sure to target him wherever he goes,” said Sulaiman Chiragh of Conscience, a rights group. Ayub was twice attacked in his prison cell in Multan.
Earlier, defense lawyer Abid Hasan Minto claimed that the evidence presented by the prosecution before the judges of the Sahiwal sessions court and Lahore High Court was not in line with the Islamic law of evidence and was therefore inadmissible. Minto, a former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, also proved beyond doubt that Muhammad Akram, the man who accused Masih of blasphemy, was a land grabber. “Almost immediately after Masih was arrested, Akram moved into his house in Chak 352 of Arifwala, Sahiwal,” Minto told the court. Later, he said, Akram filed an application with the Land Department and won allotment of the plot.
Since his arrest in October 1996 Ayub Masih had maintained that he had been falsely accused of blasphemy. In a written statement to the police, Masih said he could not dream of committing blasphemy since he had studied Islamiyat in school and had respect for Muslim beliefs.
You need 4 male witnesses before sentencing someone for adultery. And that is not negotiable or replaceable with DNA or pregnancy.
The fact that she is Pregnant cannot be used to punish her for adultery.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by google: *
You need 4 male witnesses before sentencing someone for adultery. And that is not negotiable or replaceable with DNA or pregnancy.
The fact that she is Pregnant cannot be used to punish her for adultery.
[/QUOTE]
The fact that she is not married and pregnant can. I read that more than one Sharia courts (in Malaysia, in Jordon, and in S.Arabia) have rule along the lines that you have said that 4 male witnesses are needed and DNA or any other "passive" evidence is unacceptable. That is a little hard to accept since DNA would be conclusive.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by google: *
You need 4 male witnesses before sentencing someone for adultery. And that is not negotiable or replaceable with DNA or pregnancy.
[/QUOTE]
That is a stinging indictment on relying on 1400 year old documents for modern day law.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by OldLahori: *
The fact that she is not married and pregnant can. I read that more than one Sharia courts (in Malaysia, in Jordon, and in S.Arabia) have rule along the lines that you have said that 4 male witnesses are needed and DNA or any other "passive" evidence is unacceptable. That is a little hard to accept since DNA would be conclusive.
[/QUOTE]
They CANT use DNA and Pregnancy to prove she committed adultery. The fact that some Muslim country uses this doesn’t make it into Islamic ruling.
I will tell you what is the flaw in this ruling
1) In the case a women was rape - you will never be able judge fairly
2) The case of the African women who was trick into committing extra marital sex with her neighbor through the use of witchcraft.
3) In the case of very young women (pre puberty) who is coerced to have sex with a man without her knowing what is happening
If the women admit to commit adultery then you can take her word for it only after reconfirming 4 times and at any time she is free to take her word back
If she said she didn't commit Zina/adultery and you don’t have 4 male witnesses regardless of the fact that she is pregnant she should be set free.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Seminole: *
That is a stinging indictment on relying on 1400 year old documents for modern day law.
[/QUOTE]
Al Quran is eternal seminole.
salaam to all,
GUPSHUP has been changed while i was away!!
looks great!!
[QUOTE]
They CANT use DNA and Pregnancy to prove she committed adultery. The fact that some Muslim
country uses this doesn’t make it into Islamic ruling.
[/QUOTE]
islamic ruling is based on justice and equality and not whether a DNA test is used or not........
BTW what will happen to the "male" in this story, will he be also stoned to death for having an extra-marital affair, or is stoning only for/against women??