You, me, few guppies, thousands of others can have their own views how to handle "a party of the Believers witness the punishment". How did Prophet PBUH do it? Was it behind closed doors? I believe that was not the case.
What Taliban do, how they do it, why they do it revolves around their show of power, abuse of people's belief etc.
Ehtesab, bring forth evidence of public floggings of women in the same manner as shown in this video - otherwise, your "belief" is just that - a "belief". Not shared by yours truly, thanks.
Amazing how people want to throw around their opinions, but so far, anyone supporting the Taliban's actions here has not produced any proof that they did anything right. And shame on you, as the evidence coming out points to the fact that this punishment was carried out based on no evidence of any zina in the first place!
^
No, take a look at the whole hadith holistically and it seems we're trapped between 1,2 one one side, and 3 on the other.
I question the validity of those who administer the punishment, the way the punishment was administered, and the circumstances of the case. But for all those who suggest this is, in general, a 'barbaric' punishment for the alleged crime, they clearly have lost touch with any semblance of respectable behavior. Zina is a horrendous crime, much worse than any lashing a man or woman can literally bounce up from, be it in public or semi-public. The question isn't if the punishment is fitting, but rather do the facts of the case justify the punishment.
As you can read in this thread and the other one in this forum on the same topic, the Prophet didn't go looking for evidence to malign women for whom no evidence had been brought forth.
You should be ashamed at even asking whether we have any evidence that she is innocent - the rule is, the evidence needs to be bought forth from 4 witnesses who saw a totally sexual act, were able to identify who was involved - in other words, the evidence has to be there to prove they're guilty.
Otherwise you're bringing the burden on every woman out there to bring forth evidence that she's innocent, which is the other way around. Are you willing to put your family members through that nazi-ist approach?
Picoico - where do you live that there is open sexual intercourse everywhere? Are you living near a nude beach or something? Because I can tell you that kind of thing is not the norm around the world...not yet, at least.
also, point number 4 is also not true. if anything men outnumber women globally, and in many countries (such as China) there is an acute disparity between men and women. there are 119 men for every 100 women in the most populous country in the world. The second most populous country doesnt have encouraging ratios either.
Picoico - where do you live that there is open sexual intercourse everywhere? Are you living near a nude beach or something? Because I can tell you that kind of thing is not the norm around the world...not yet, at least.
PCG, pay attention to the hadith. It said illegal not open. Illegal constitutes intercourse out of wedlock or with someone other than your spouse. If a woman in a muslim society gets pregnant out of wedlock and her crime went undetected until she gives birth, then what do you say?
If you believe in freedom, its irrelevant whether you think sex outside marriage is wrong.
That said, even if you believe the government should regulate things that are harmful, the onus is on the proponents of prohibition to demonstrate that it is actually physically or psychologically harmful. So far you have given us nothing.
just a last point to make, Governments should have no right to interfere in the private lives of individuals. If 2 unmarried adults agree to have a sexual relationship in private then that is their business. There is no need for govt's to shove their moral code down everyone's throat.
The continuation of these relationships should be cherished, not scorned. It's ludicrous to say there is any negative impact on society from people having sex in private outside of a defined contractual setting.
The punishment of 40 lashes is described in the Quran, and so I would not have a problem with that, but the Quran does not call for public lashings. And if you bother to read the hadith literature then you will find hadith that clearly state how avoidant the Prophet was in even trying to administer these punishments or look for such sinners. There is a famous one of a man who sinned who confessed to Muhammed and Muhammed (SAW) tried to find every reason not to punish the guy before exasperated and completely bewildered by how desperate the man was in seeking a punishment, that he finally did reluctantly deliver the punishment. I see no such spirit in the Taliban.
Simple guys. There is no rocket science here. What that video shows is not Islam, and if you think it is, then you need counseling for mental health issues, or possibly, you need to get evaluated for delirium.
Humans do have an instinctual drive for sexual relations and activity as an important part of social biology and social structures.
Who the hell are you to think you should be allowed to so completely destroy a person's sexual nature because you're too scared to deal with sexual expression?
You should be ashamed at even asking whether we have any evidence that she is innocent - the rule is, the evidence needs to be bought forth from 4 witnesses who saw a totally sexual act, were able to identify who was involved - in other words, the evidence has to be there to prove they're guilty.
The girl will be asked to prove her innocence in court by the CJ are u going to tell him that he should be ashamed to asked this Qs?
No where in the Quran it is stated so clearly that 4 witnesses should see the actual sexual act, this is your imagination.
I know Prophet did not go around looking for women involved in certian illegal acts. I just asked "were such type of cases ever brought to his knowledge and what action of advice he did, in light of Quran and suna"
Plz first read the my statement carefully, rather than making emotional judgments. And dont get personal and start involving family members. Its very childish of u.
also, point number 4 is also not true. if anything men outnumber women globally, and in many countries (such as China) there is an acute disparity between men and women. there are 119 men for every 100 women in the most populous country in the world. The second most populous country doesnt have encouraging ratios either.
Then wait and see. as the hadith doesnt give any specific time or country where and when this ratio will be true.
^ you mentioned this hadith in context of the situation today. it is not the case at present. men outnumber women by a fair number, instead of the drastically reversed situation in the hadis.
Humans do have an instinctual drive for sexual relations and activity as an important part of social biology and social structures.
Who the hell are you to think you should be allowed to so completely destroy a person's sexual nature because you're too scared to deal with sexual expression?
Who the hell are you to tell us anything in opposition to God?
If you believe in freedom, its irrelevant whether you think sex outside marriage is wrong.
Then we don't believe in "freedom", I suppose...
[quote]
That said, even if you believe the government should regulate things that are harmful, the onus is on the proponents of prohibition to demonstrate that it is actually physically or psychologically harmful. So far you have given us nothing.
[/quote]
Why? According to whom?
Using drugs falls into the same category...indeed, most of the dangers of drug use stem from it's legal status. Nobdoy bothered convincing "us"...nevermind the arbitrary exemption of alcohol...
And yes, one could argue about the harmful affects the sexualization of society has...from expoitation of people using sexual imagery, to areas where the average child bearing age is 15, and so on...
[quote]
just a last point to make, Governments should have no right to interfere in the private lives of individuals. If 2 unmarried adults agree to have a sexual relationship in private then that is their business. There is no need for govt's to shove their moral code down everyone's throat.
[/quote]
If these 2 unmarried adults start blabbing about their relationship, and suggest there's nothing wrong with it, contrary to the mores of the rest of society...indeed, even as an attempt to subvert and alter society... (which is apparently a very good thing when liberals do it, but when us conservatives do it people start talking about mass deportations)...then it's not so private.
It's one thing for state officials to do spot-checks in peoples bedrooms...it's another to catch people in the act...
PCG, pay attention to the hadith. It said illegal not open. Illegal constitutes intercourse out of wedlock or with someone other than your spouse. If a woman in a muslim society gets pregnant out of wedlock and her crime went undetected until she gives birth, then what do you say?
The punishment for adultry cannot be given on the basis of pregnancy or birth according to the three major fiqh unless she confesses or there is enough evidence.
we agree to disagree. Individual freedom > all isms.
Why? According to whom?
Using drugs falls into the same category...indeed, most of the dangers of drug use stem from it's legal status. Nobdoy bothered convincing "us"...nevermind the arbitrary exemption of alcohol...
it is actually your logic that is flawed. You fail to distinguish between crimes that directly affect other people and crimes like drug use which involve a personal choice where the only "victim" is the users. (YEAH THE VICTIM)
I believe for the most part the government has no place telling us what is acceptable and unacceptable if it doesn't harm anyone else. Why should pre martial sex be an exception?
And yes, one could argue about the harmful affects the sexualization of society has...from expoitation of people using sexual imagery, to areas where the average child bearing age is 15, and so on...
[citation needed]
If these 2 unmarried adults start blabbing about their relationship, and suggest there's nothing wrong with it, contrary to the mores of the rest of society...indeed, even as an attempt to subvert and alter society... (which is apparently a very good thing when liberals do it, but when us conservatives do it people start talking about mass deportations)...then it's not so private.
****ing LOL.
But why should a social phenomenon be illegal? It's not the govenment's job to regulate relationships.
It's one thing for state officials to do spot-checks in peoples bedrooms...it's another to catch people in the act...
Why are you so afraid of sex and intimacy? the only charges that i would agree with is if the 2 adults were having sex in public. every other moral defense should be thrown in the bin.