Woman being stoned to death Islam Explain

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

xris
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 08:14 am
@josh0335,
josh0335;134560 wrote:
Because a certain brand of Islam, funded by Saudi oil money, is becoming more and more widespread. If you asked a Muslim of the older generation whether stoning is allowed, you would most likely get a resounding no. But ask a young Muslim in the UK, and you may very well get a confident yes. Why? Because the parents of these younger Muslims didn't learn Islam from internet websites and free pamphlets funded by Saudi Arabia, whereas their children do. This is something you have to acknowledge if you are serious about why people believe the things they do.

But it is though. The majority of Muslim countries don't stone anyone.

The majority stand with me because the majority do not stone people.



Turkey has it completely wrong. If you read up on how secularism was shoved down the throats of the people after the fall of the Ottomans you wouldn't be saying this. Muslims have every right to want shariah. But shariah isn't what you think it is.
Saudi is the one with the money and god knows what other schemes it is involved with. It may well be the fountain of this fundamental inspiration but it is how us kaffs have to judge its accomplishments. It aspires to build giant imposing mosques wherever it can but denies the simple right of worship in its own lands. Like it or not, it imposes its views and its values on us all and by it we have to judge Islam.

There is enough examples of corrupt sharia to convince most moderate Muslims that it has no advantage. It is not enough to not just be quite on stoning you have to be extremely vocal. Innocent girls are being killed by this evil and it needs your community to make itself heard. You may yearn for the Caliph but not many who have lived under sharia ever wish to return. You give me the countries that has introduced sharia where you can be proud of its advantage.
 
josh0335
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 09:07 am
@xris,
kennethamy;134561 wrote:
And it is also true that only shariah allows for stoning.


It does not. I've already said this. If you disagree, tell me why.

xris;134563 wrote:
Saudi is the one with the money and god knows what other schemes it is involved with. It may well be the fountain of this fundamental inspiration but it is how us kaffs have to judge its accomplishments. It aspires to build giant imposing mosques wherever it can but denies the simple right of worship in its own lands. Like it or not, it imposes its views and its values on us all and by it we have to judge Islam.


Why by it must you judge Islam?

Quote:
There is enough examples of corrupt sharia to convince most moderate Muslims that it has no advantage.
What has no advantage? Shariah? Most Muslims would disagree with you. If something becomes corrupted, why does it follow that it would not be advanageous if it was fixed? Unless you believe Islamic shariah is a corrupt concept altogether.

Quote:
It is not enough to not just be quite on stoning you have to be extremely vocal. Innocent girls are being killed by this evil and it needs your community to make itself heard. You may yearn for the Caliph but not many who have lived under sharia ever wish to return. You give me the countries that has introduced sharia where you can be proud of its advantage.
What would I have to do to be 'extremely vocal'?

You don't know anyone who's ever lived under Islamic shariah. Iran and Saudi Arabia are not examples of shariah run countries. The Hijaz under the leadership of the Prophet introduced shariah and went from strength to strength. The shariah was eroded as the leadership became dynasties, from the Ummayads, to Abbasids and finally to the Ottomans. The 'shariah' you see examples of today are not really shariah, as they based on stagnated interpretations and out-of-context teachings.
 
The Dude phil phil
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 09:11 am
@Alan McDougall,
Alan McDougall;133939 wrote:

The point is; Christians and Jews do not do these appalling things anymore".

The genuine photo is obviously taken not too long ago and this type of hideous depravity is still being done in the name of god and Islam.


You can't speak for every Jew and Christian in the world. The fact of the matter is, scripture is a vague, self-contradictory, and open to a trillion different interpretations ranging from literal and dead-serious to completely allegorical. Scripture brings comfort and purpose to some people's lives, and it answers basic questions, but it's based entirely on human ideas and isn't scientific at all.

You can't say that just because you and most of the Christians and Jews you know don't support this kind of inhumane capital punishment that "Christians and Jews do not do these appalling things anymore". There's some exception to your rule somewhere because Christians and Jews are not static beings. Nor are Muslims.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 09:13 am
@josh0335,
josh0335;134587 wrote:

You don't know anyone who's ever lived under Islamic shariah. Iran and Saudi Arabia are not examples of shariah run countries. The Hijaz under the leadership of the Prophet introduced shariah and went from strength to strength. The shariah was eroded as the leadership became dynasties, from the Ummayads, to Abbasids and finally to the Ottomans. The 'shariah' you see examples of today are not really shariah, as they based on stagnated interpretations and out-of-context teachings.


Yes, of course. And the Soviet Union was not an example of communism, and Nazi Germany was not an example of fascism, and so on. "Treason never prospers, and what's the reason? If it prospers, none dare call it treason".
 
Dave Allen
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 10:03 am
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;134559 wrote:
It cannot be that the point of your post was to write the post, was it?

I think it pretty much was. I very much doubt this thread will contribute much to solving of abuse of rights amongst certain religious communities, or for that matter the use of bogus or misleading images to make a statement.

It's a forum on teh internets - not a letter to my MP. It whiled away a bit of my time putting certain thoughts together and typing them out and seeing how people reacted.

The non muslim contributors will tend to say "how awful", and those of them who think they have nothing pressing to improve about their own societies will tut and bemoan the complacency of muslims in not preventing such things or not being loud enough in calling for change.

The muslim contributors will point out that this isn't done in their name, or occur in their own sects or communities and is done by people who "don't get" what Islam's really about.

When the same topic gets raised again in five months time the reaction will probably be pretty similar.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 10:11 am
@Dave Allen,
Dave Allen;134605 wrote:
I think it pretty much was. I very much doubt this thread will contribute much to solving of abuse of rights amongst certain religious communities, or for that matter the use of bogus or misleading images to make a statement.

It's a forum on teh internets - not a letter to my MP. It whiled away a bit of my time putting certain thoughts together and typing them out and seeing how people reacted.

The non Muslim contributors will tend to say "how awful", and those of them who think they have nothing pressing to improve about their own societies will tut and bemoan the complacency of muslims in not preventing such things.

The Muslim contributors will point out that this isn't done in their name, or occur in their own sects or communities and is done by people who "don't get" what Islam's really about.

When the same topic gets raised again in five months time the reaction will probably be pretty similar.


Hmmm. It often happens that people write posts that have nothing to say, but it is rare that they admit it.
 
Dave Allen
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 10:15 am
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;134607 wrote:
Hmmm. It often happens that people write posts that have nothing to say, but it is rare that they admit it.

Hmmmmm yeah, what scintilating insight.

If you didn't want the answer you shouldn't have popped the query.
 
xris
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 10:17 am
@josh0335,
josh0335;134587 wrote:
It does not. I've already said this. If you disagree, tell me why.



Why by it must you judge Islam?

What has no advantage? Shariah? Most Muslims would disagree with you. If something becomes corrupted, why does it follow that it would not be advanageous if it was fixed? Unless you believe Islamic shariah is a corrupt concept altogether.

What would I have to do to be 'extremely vocal'?

You don't know anyone who's ever lived under Islamic shariah. Iran and Saudi Arabia are not examples of shariah run countries. The Hijaz under the leadership of the Prophet introduced shariah and went from strength to strength. The shariah was eroded as the leadership became dynasties, from the Ummayads, to Abbasids and finally to the Ottomans. The 'shariah' you see examples of today are not really shariah, as they based on stagnated interpretations and out-of-context teachings.
I dont have to judge Islam but I do.

Sharia has no examples you can give me, so how can you make claims of its success. I hear the same arguments for so many Utopian states that only ever have a distorted historical reference. The only sharia we see are never held up as examples to be admired but they are sharia. I can see its value for certain domestic issues but not criminal.

---------- Post added 03-02-2010 at 11:21 AM ----------

Dave Allen;134605 wrote:
I think it pretty much was. I very much doubt this thread will contribute much to solving of abuse of rights amongst certain religious communities, or for that matter the use of bogus or misleading images to make a statement.

It's a forum on teh internets - not a letter to my MP. It whiled away a bit of my time putting certain thoughts together and typing them out and seeing how people reacted.

The non muslim contributors will tend to say "how awful", and those of them who think they have nothing pressing to improve about their own societies will tut and bemoan the complacency of muslims in not preventing such things or not being loud enough in calling for change.

The muslim contributors will point out that this isn't done in their name, or occur in their own sects or communities and is done by people who "don't get" what Islam's really about.

When the same topic gets raised again in five months time the reaction will probably be pretty similar.
If you have preconceptions on the ability of debaters then you can be excused service on this one. Don't get what Islam is about...hummmm so you do?
 
Dave Allen
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 10:36 am
@xris,
xris;134614 wrote:
Don't get what Islam is about...hummmm so you do?

I reckon traumatised societies with a history of conflict, poverty and lack of education can be gulled as a gestalt into valuing more overtly productive citizens to a disproportionate degree.

A disturbing upshot of this is that outsiders (such as gay men or religious dissenters) can be seen as threats and women reduced to the state of homebodies and second class citizens (and those who dissent from this seen as threats).

Which I think is awful. But to a certain degree I'm afforded the luxury of thinking its awful because I know where my next meal's coming from and the IDF haven't knocked my house down.

Throughout history we've seen this pattern endemic to societies were daily survival cannot be taken for granted.

It strikes me as having more to do with poverty than any religious belief - though religious beliefs appeal to the uneducated and therefore become entwined.

The Islamic world is largely a poor world, whereas western christendom is relatively wealthy. Wealth affords moral comforts as well as physical goods - it's easier not to behave like the kids in Lord of the Flies if you're not stuck on a desert island. Or in a desert.

This is why westerners think stoning women is worse than poisoning them with depleted uranium. At least - that's what our media tends to concentrate on. "Don't look at those depressing deformities we could have avoided - check out these awful beheadings - isn't Islam shite!?"

Many of the problems people are associating with Islam here have been seen in the western world during times of strife (lynchings in depression era US - the rise of totalitarianism in Germany and Russia when their economies were clearly weaker than those of their neighbours) or in countries like Ethiopia which are Christian but have a similar cultural heritage to what we consider Islamic countries.

Morality under duress - a human condition, not merely an Islamic one.

I suspect a modicum of peace, prosperity and education would improve matters as much as a different religious perspective.

Though the end of any kind of religious orthodoxy is something I'd like to see as well - worldwide.

Won't happen though.
 
Pepijn Sweep
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 11:47 am
@Dave Allen,
Dave Allen;134554 wrote:
So what's the second picture you linked to about then?


I think you should first apollogize to the other members of the forum. We also have to read your rude language. How you expect we see you and what image you give us ?

Both in christian and islamitic and communistic etcetera countries people get killed by their governments. In Europe we have a little tradition of seperating church and state.

Reading a little in Al Quo'ran Ilost my sympathy for Osama ibn Laden. Years ago he was herauted as the Messiash in Soedan and look what happen in Dafur. I trully think he is a war criminal attacking civilians in the WTC in NY.
:Glasses:

 
xris
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 11:57 am
@Dave Allen,
By my inquiring of these atrocities does not make me conclude that other horrors are not to examined. These acts are not indicative of poverty, in fact the opposite in most cases. The KSA is probably the richest kingdom on earth and Iran is not exactly poor. Indonesia,again not exactly poor, has just adopted this cruelty, Nigeria has a certain amount of poverty but I dont think this excuses them. The sudan is just plane barbaric , rich or poor and they would still want to execute for any reason. Rural pakistan is poor but it does not happen among the poor Christians. Afghanistan has a long history of cruelty and maybe their surroundings have harden their souls. I wont hide my disgust because it might upset a few sensitive Muslims, there is more harm in ignoring these atrocities than examining them. No one questions Amnesty in their attention, why question my motives?
 
Dave Allen
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 12:04 pm
@xris,
xris;134633 wrote:
The KSA is probably the richest kingdom on earth and Iran is not exactly poor. Indonesia,again not exactly poor, has just adopted this cruelty, Nigeria has a certain amount of poverty but I dont think this excuses them.
I think you're confusing the wealth of a nation with the wealth of its inhabitants.

I also said - a number of times - that I think such things are awful.

Which is a wierd way of "excusing them" as far as I see it.
Quote:
No one questions Amnesty in their attention, why question my motives?
Amnesty are often the subject of enquiry and I didn't query your motives. I responded to a question you put to me.

---------- Post added 03-02-2010 at 01:05 PM ----------

Pepijn Sweep;134631 wrote:
I think you should first apollogize to the other members of the forum. We also have to read your rude language. How you expect we see you and what image you give us ?
Someone who dislikes being gulled by a charlatan?
 
xris
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 01:27 pm
@Dave Allen,
Dave whats your purpose ? to excuse objectionable executions by telling me poverty breeds state violence ? Then you call Amnesty into question because it reports these events. I believed you to be moved by better motives than this.

Just stop for a moment and consider what your opinions would be if America had hung two teenage boys in public from industrial cranes for being homosexual. Or on a weekly basis you witnessed the same barbaric scenes in KSA, in Belfast. It may not be ever Muslims idea of justice but it is for great deal of them and many with that view live in our communities.
 
Pepijn Sweep
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 01:47 pm
@Dave Allen,
In Europe we had our traditional witch-burnings if they scared the local christians. Now there are no more .

In the same time there was a highly developped culture under the rule of just leaders. Their was respect for christians, jews and moslims a-like. This was Al-Andaluz; in my opinion one of Worlds best civilizations. For me proof government can work, also under arabic Rule.
 
Dave Allen
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 02:09 pm
@xris,
xris;134683 wrote:
to excuse objectionable executions by telling me poverty breeds state violence ?

I called them "awful" didn't I?

More than once in fact.

I even broadly objected to capital punishment in every society. Not that you bothered to notice.

I don't think the fact that poverty is a contributing factor to state violence excuses anyone really, but I think the fact remains even if it's an unpleasant fact. An awful fact.
Quote:
Then you call Amnesty into question because it reports these events.
When did I do this?

I said amnesty came under enquiry a lot - as it does from various stakeholders and critics. I haven't held it to account myself though. I think of all the world's institutions it's one of the best. I have volunteered as a worker for Amnesty a few times and consider it time well spent.

Quote:
Just stop for a moment and consider what your opinions would be if America had hung two teenage boys in public from industrial cranes for being homosexual.
"Awful" - perhaps?

Not too long ago Christians in the South of the US used to lynch people because they were black and not as respectful as the Christian americans wanted them to be.

Which was awful.

They still think it's fine to litter Iraq with depeleted uranium.

Which is awful.

Quote:
Or on a weekly basis you witnessed the same barbaric scenes in KSA, in Belfast.

Ten years ago in Belfast I ws working with the BBC, and was a sort of runner/dogsbody on an interveiw of a man who was being released from jail after a short sentence because he was considered a PoW for stoving two drunk catholic boys' heads in with a breeze block.

Their crime?

They "got into a protestant taxi".

Which is awful.

Until recently that sort of thing used to occur in Belfast on a very regular basis - with the approval of many Christians.

Which was awful.

Last year some of these Christians, in this case catholic ones, went back to blowing up policemen in the hope of igniting the violence again.

Which I thought was awful. Hope they fail.

Quote:
It may not be ever Muslims idea of justice but it is for great deal of them and many with that view live in our communities.

How awful.

"Oh you're just excusing it Dave."

I'm not, I said it was awful. I've called it awful loads of times.

"I can't see why you'd excuse it like that."

Oh for Heaven's sake!
 
xris
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 02:50 pm
@Dave Allen,
Dave Allen;134730 wrote:
I called them "awful" didn't I?

More than once in fact.

I even broadly objected to capital punishment in every society. Not that you bothered to notice.

I don't think the fact that poverty is a contributing factor to state violence excuses anyone really, but I think the fact remains even if it's an unpleasant fact. An awful fact.When did I do this?

I said amnesty came under enquiry a lot - as it does from various stakeholders and critics. I haven't held it to account myself though. I think of all the world's institutions it's one of the best. I have volunteered as a worker for Amnesty a few times and consider it time well spent.

"Awful" - perhaps?

Not too long ago Christians in the South of the US used to lynch people because they were black and not as respectful as the Christian americans wanted them to be.

Which was awful.

They still think it's fine to litter Iraq with depeleted uranium.

Which is awful.


Ten years ago in Belfast I ws working with the BBC, and was a sort of runner/dogsbody on an interveiw of a man who was being released from jail after a short sentence because he was considered a PoW for stoving two drunk catholic boys' heads in with a breeze block.

Their crime?

They "got into a protestant taxi".

Which is awful.

Until recently that sort of thing used to occur in Belfast on a very regular basis - with the approval of many Christians.

Which was awful.

Last year some of these Christians, in this case catholic ones, went back to blowing up policemen in the hope of igniting the violence again.

Which I thought was awful. Hope they fail.


How awful.

"Oh you're just excusing it Dave."

I'm not, I said it was awful. I've called it awful loads of times.

"I can't see why you'd excuse it like that."

Oh for Heaven's sake!
Dave I know of these horrors and if you wish to make them a subject for debate lets do it. I admire your time spent with Amnesty I only wish Id had the chance. If I mistakenly confused your views I apologize. My only concern is this fear of debating such controversial issues in these times of mutual mistrust.
 
Dave Allen
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 02:57 pm
@xris,
xris;134783 wrote:
Dave I know of these horrors and if you wish to make them a subject for debate lets do it. I admire your time spent with Amnesty I only wish Id had the chance.
I'm sure if you contact your local office they'd love to have you. It's not really glamorous work, mostly just answering phones and the like.
Quote:
If I mistakenly confused your views I apologize. My only concern is this fear of debating such controversial issues in these times of mutual mistrust.
I think it's all Ok really, as I said to Kenneth - I don't think this debate will change much for a long long time.

But I do think it's a bit misleading to suggest there's any fear of this debate - it's very pervasive in the British media, and comes around regularly enough here as well.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 03:00 pm
@Dave Allen,
Dave Allen;134612 wrote:
Hmmmmm yeah, what scintilating insight.

If you didn't want the answer you shouldn't have popped the query.


Is that really your best effort? I think I might have thought of something better than that.
 
polpol
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 04:59 pm
@kennethamy,
To stone or not to stone...that is not the question
It's not as if once we see an end to stoning we will see an end to the violence against women. Violence against women is a global reality, true each culture has its own methods of controlling women more or less barbaric but what's the point of condemning the method used to kill a woman as if there are better or worse ways to do it. In our developed societies women still get killed by their lovers and husbands, and little girls still get abused by their fathers or some pervert. We still need shelters for abused women, child pornography and rape is on the rise, we have anorexy,etc.
In our modern societies, when a woman does not abide by the rules we use more sophisticated methods, we drive her crazy and then we put her on medication...indeed a less barbaric method of controlling her but to me it's just a matter of culture and there is something wrong in condemning what is happening far away instead of looking at what is happening in our own backyards.
We must get over the anti-muslim -pro-war propaganda, it's not helping anyone except those that are profitting from that ugly and stupid war in Afghanistan which has made complete fools of the Americans and the West in general.
Iran does not accept homosexuals but the gov't. covers all medical expenses for men and women that want to change sex...and such people are well accepted by their families and community.
 
Alan McDougall
 
Reply Tue 2 Mar, 2010 07:30 pm
@polpol,
polpol;134876 wrote:
To stone or not to stone...that is not the question
It's not as if once we see an end to stoning we will see an end to the violence against women. Violence against women is a global reality, true each culture has its own methods of controlling women more or less barbaric but what's the point of condemning the method used to kill a woman as if there are better or worse ways to do it. In our developed societies women still get killed by their lovers and husbands, and little girls still get abused by their fathers or some pervert. We still need shelters for abused women, child pornography and rape is on the rise, we have anorexy,etc.
In our modern societies, when a woman does not abide by the rules we use more sophisticated methods, we drive her crazy and then we put her on medication...indeed a less barbaric method of controlling her but to me it's just a matter of culture and there is something wrong in condemning what is happening far away instead of looking at what is happening in our own backyards.
We must get over the anti-muslim -pro-war propaganda, it's not helping anyone except those that are profitting from that ugly and stupid war in Afghanistan which has made complete fools of the Americans and the West in general.
Iran does not accept homosexuals but the gov't. covers all medical expenses for men and women that want to change sex...and such people are well accepted by their families and community.


So because woman are abused all over the world we must excuse the organized government sanctioned barbaric acts such as the of stoning and throwing acid at a beautiful face of an innocent woman or cutting off her breasts .

Must I make a detailed list before you stop trying to excuse the barbarism of these Muslem fundamentals
 
 

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 10/21/2021 at 12:11:20