Stoning to death and Sharia law

MooseJam

So what are all your opinions of stoning to death and Islam, the internet being what is is I've been unfortunate enough to view both children and adults ( women of course) being stoned to death while all present shout Allah Hu Akbar. What are your thoughts on the matter, do you think it is an acceptable part of Islam ?

the_new_mr

Well, first of all, there is most definitely no part of Islam that allows the stoning of children. Children are not considered to be responsible for their actions and even then, if stoning is in fact a part of Islam, it's only for married adulterers. Let me make that absolutely clear.

Which brings me to the point of whether or not it actually is a part of Islam. Much is being discussed about this in the Islamic world these days. Tariq Ramadan is one person who is calling for a moratorium on the issuing of stoning in the Islamic world.

One idea is that it's not part of Islam in that it what is mentioned in the Quran seems to cover the situation without specifics. More on this later.

There is a hadith saying that a man came to the Prophet Mohamed (peace be upon him) and testified against himself four times (satisfying by himself the required condition of four witnesses for someone being accused of fornication or adultery). Each time, the Prophet is said to have turned away not wanting the man to continue. It is said that the Prophet asked the man something along the lines of "Are you sure you have committed what you say you have?" "Did you do what a man does with his wife?" etc. It is also said that the Prophet Mohamed (peace be upon him) asked people from the man's tribe to come forth to testify that this man wasn't insane. The man went away and came back with people from his tribe to testify. Then, the Prophet found himself with no option but to carry out the stoning.

And, I think, when it began, the man began to run half way through and the people stoning him followed to which the Prophet later stated when he found this out "Why did you follow him if he didn't want it?!!"

That's one hadith. Another is of a woman who came and did the same. She was pregnant so the Prophet told her to come back after giving birth hoping that she would change her mind. She gave birth and he told her to come back after weening the child. She weened the child and came back still insisting. I can't remember how that one ends but you get the picture.

Anyway, let me put forward two cases. One being that the law is there (although not currently being carried out properly) and one is that the law isn't there.

Case 1:
If the law is there, there is no question that in countries like Nigeria, it is not being carried out correctly at all. The law requires for four trust worthy, pious citizens to testify that they saw, without a shadow of a doubt, two people performing the highest form of sexual interaction. I don't want to get into detail here but I'm sure you get the idea. Understandably, this is very difficult to achieve and should hardly ever happen.

So, thus it becomes very difficult for this situation to even come around.

One point made is that the law is nearly more to protect the society than to punish the individuals. Psychologists strongly recommend that when a couple wish to engage in intimacy, they should make sure to lock the bedroom door if they have children as a young child can become emotionally scarred quite badly if they see something like that at that age. I mean, honestly, who would let FOUR witnesses see them in the act?!!!! It's pure carelessness!!

It should also be noted that in countries where they carry this out, apart from not having the correct conditions fulfilled, it always seems to be against women... which of course is ridiculous.

As has been said before on this forum countless times, you can't blame Islam for the acts of individuals.

So, that's case 1.

Case 2:
In the second case, it's stated that, since the Quran does not specifically mention that the punishment for adultery is stoning then it's not part of the Sharia law. The only mention of punishment for those who commit sex outside of wedlock is flogging and there's no specific mention that this is only for unmarried individuals.

Al-Nur:1-2

"A Surah [is this] which We have bestowed from on high, and which We have laid down in plain terms; and in it have We bestowed from on high messages which are clear [in themselves], so that you might keep [them] in mind.; As for the adulteress and the adulterer flog each of them with a hundred stripes, and let not compassion with them keep you from [carrying out] this law of God, if you [truly] believe in God and the Last Day; and let a group of the believers witness their chastisement."

And, here's an interesting verse:

Al-Nur:4

"And as for those who accuse chaste women [of adultery], and then are unable to produce four witnesses [in support of their accusation], flog them with eighty stripes and ever after refuse to accept from them any testimony - since it is they, they that are truly depraved!"

I really love that last verse. So many times have I heard awful slander against women without any knowledge or justification. Reputations are often trashed with such talk. 80 lashes!! It's not to be sniffed at!!

As for my own opinion, I'm kind of leaning towards case 2. But even if it is case 1, we can see the stringent conditions required and how it's really there to stop society going crazy in front of everyone's eyes.

InFront

If someone is guilty of a crime worthy of the death penalty, then it may be that the death penalty would only be the beginning of their suffering, which is quite a disturbing thought really. May Allah guide us on the right path.

In a genuine case where the sin has been proven, where stoning is warranted, things would have to be really, really serious. In the case of adultery, for example, people say things like "what goes on between two individuals is none of our business", and while that argument might at first sound compelling in principle, and as the_new_mr pointed to already, well if four people have already been witness to the sin it isn't between two individuals anymore, it's very public.

I agree that the death penalty has a place in society, that its place is to keep a society in order, and that the death penalty, as it stands, is greatly abused and misused, not least in countries which one might expect to be governed by Islam,but are instead guided by very corrupt, imperfect human beings. Unfortunately, the application of the death penalty is not immune to abuse.

Horizen

InFront wrote:

In a genuine case where the sin has been proven, where stoning is warranted

Ok you just lost any respect I could have had for you, "where stoning is warranted" , have you no sense of humanity or compasion for your fellow man, there is nothing that could warrant the brutality of killing someone by smashing their head in with rocks and if you believe their is you are truly one very sick individual, the horrific thing is that the "crime" that "warrants" this is adultery, the punishment for this should be a divorce not stoning to death, and the fact that many muslims believe it does warrant a stoning leads us enlightened westerners to view Islam as a barbaric throwback

jhegarty

InFront wrote:

If someone is guilty of a crime worthy of the death penalty, then it may be that the death penalty would only be the beginning of their suffering, which is quite a disturbing thought really. May Allah guide us on the right path.

In a genuine case where the sin has been proven, where stoning is warranted, things would have to be really, really serious. In the case of adultery, for example, people say things like "what goes on between two individuals is none of our business", and while that argument might at first sound compelling in principle, and as the_new_mr pointed to already, well if four people have already been witness to the sin it isn't between two individuals anymore, it's very public.

I agree that the death penalty has a place in society, that its place is to keep a society in order, and that the death penalty, as it stands, is greatly abused and misused, not least in countries which one might expect to be governed by Islam,but are instead guided by very corrupt, imperfect human beings. Unfortunately, the application of the death penalty is not immune to abuse.

Am I miss-reading your post , or are you saying stoning is justified in the case of adultery ?

I really hope I am miss-reading it...

county

jhegarty wrote:

Am I miss-reading your post , or are you saying stoning is justified in the case of adultery ?

I really hope I am miss-reading it...

dont think so,quite a post though

MooseJam

truly a horrendous idea, jhegarty you are a disgrace to humanity

jon1981

MooseJam wrote:

truly a horrendous idea, jhegarty you are a disgrace to humanity

why is he a disgrace? ?? hes disagreeing with it!

Peanut

InFront wrote:

I agree that the death penalty has a place in society, that its place is to keep a society in order...

State/religious sanctioned murder?
No thanks...

InFront

Horizen wrote:

Ok you just lost any respect I could have had for you, "where stoning is warranted" , have you no sense of humanity or compasion for your fellow man... if you believe their is you are truly one very sick individual

I did say that the crime would be a very very serious one, detested by Allah, and fully proven of course. I appreciate that you don't agree, and I certainly don't like or rejoice at the death penalty myself, but that eventuality does exist.
Which form of administering death is best is a more complex issue, but yes I think stoning can be one of those methods under some serious circumstances.

it does warrant a stoning leads us enlightened westerners to view Islam as a barbaric throwback

I'm not sure what the relevance of the term westerner is? Maybe you mean enlightened according to traditionally Western paradigms. In any event, I'm not the spokesman for Islam, don't take your view of Islam from what I say, but starting from what the Qur'an says.

Horizen

InFront wrote:

don't take your view of Islam from what I say, but starting from what the Qur'an says.

I surely won't take my view of Islam from what you say for it is the most reprehensible thing I have heard in a long time, I'm not familiar with the teachings of the Qur'an but I truly hope your opinions can not be found within and that it's primary message would be be love for your fellow man and forgiveness of wrongdoings and not lets smash his brains in with rocks

PDN

MooseJam wrote:

So what are all your opinions of stoning to death and Islam, the internet being what is is I've been unfortunate enough to view both children and adults ( women of course) being stoned to death while all present shout Allah Hu Akbar. What are your thoughts on the matter, do you think it is an acceptable part of Islam ?

Unfortunate? That would imply that the act of viewing such things happened to you against your will.

I am truly sorry that someone forced you to watch such events, but I guess that is preferable to being a sick-minded voyeur who deliberately viewed such material.

galactus

MooseJam wrote:

So what are all your opinions of stoning to death and Islam, the internet being what is is I've been unfortunate enough to view both children and adults ( women of course) being stoned to death while all present shout Allah Hu Akbar. What are your thoughts on the matter, do you think it is an acceptable part of Islam ?

Yeah, a good point. But is too late too stone Jar-Jar Binks to death?

Hobbes

Lets nip this in the bud.

Next person to insult another poster gets a week ban. I don't care who it is or if that is how you feel about the other poster.

MooseJam your just back from a two month ban so your already on shakey ground. So word your responses better or your next ban may be permanent.

Personally I'm against the death penalty. Certainly against it for Adultry. But whats the difference between stoning or hanging/injection/electrocution that *western* methods use. Are we somehow more human in how we kill others?

I also refer people to the Charter that mentions that no one person is a spokesman for Islam here. Quite obvious when you consider InFront and the_new_mr posts are different.

The point is to direct you to parts of the Quran they may know in answering your question. It is not a platform for you to attack.

Now keep it civil.

Bottle_of_Smoke

the_new_mr wrote:

One point made is that the law is nearly more to protect the society than to punish the individuals. Psychologists strongly recommend that when a couple wish to engage in intimacy, they should make sure to lock the bedroom door if they have children as a young child can become emotionally scarred quite badly if they see something like that at that age. I mean, honestly, who would let FOUR witnesses see them in the act?!!!! It's pure carelessness!!

I wonder about this. You may possibly know. Do the four witnesses have to have witnessed intercourse?

Or

Could one witness have seen them go to the cinema, one share a cab, one buying condoms & one go into a hotel room?

If they have to have witnessed it(which seems like a prequisite to ensure it never happens tbh).... is there a chance Muhammed(PBUH) could been speaking symbolically about adultery?

Was a good post btw, How reliable are Hadiths, or even that Hadith, in comparison to the Qu'ran?

InFront wrote:

In a genuine case where the sin has been proven, where stoning is warranted, things would have to be really, really serious. In the case of adultery, for example, people say things like "what goes on between two individuals is none of our business", and while that argument might at first sound compelling in principle, and as the_new_mr pointed to already, well if four people have already been witness to the sin it isn't between two individuals anymore, it's very public.

For what sort of crimes would you consider stoning warranted?

InFront

Horizen wrote:

I surely won't take my view of Islam from what you say for it is the most reprehensible thing I have heard in a long time

The_new_mr, who is also a Muslim, veers toward the opinion that the law is not part of the Shariah, so please remember that again I'm not supposing to speak on behalf of anything or anyone but my own beliefs.
Again, I'd suggest you make up your own mind about Islam, and not base your feelings on your attitude towards the beliefs of a Muslim.

I'm not familiar with the teachings of the Qur'an but I truly hope your opinions can not be found within and that it's primary message would be be love for your fellow man and forgiveness of wrongdoings and not lets smash his brains in with rocks

Islam is a comprehensive, complete guide in every aspect of personal and family and community life, including criminal justice.
With the realization that sometimes there are bad people who do bad things, we cannot just selectively abandon the punitive aspects of justice, or take a neutral stance on responding to criminality, or let society collapse around us because we didn't want to interfere.

I'm not entirely sure Horizen if your main problem is with the death penalty or specifically with stoning, maybe you can clarify?

And I will also clarify and repeat that I'm not in favour of the death penalty, much less stoning, for just any crime or sin or whim, or where there is any doubt about the guilt of the sinner; but actually a very serious sin where there are four witnesses agreeing on all the details of a crime, in a situation where there is no doubt, and no doubt that the crime is without doubt, sufficiently serious. The Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, once said “Avoid the execution of punishments if there is doubt”.

I cannot see anything that realistically contradicts what seems to be a very strong unity on behalf of the ulema (scholars) with regard to the authenticity of the death penalty in Islam, and also the authenticity of stoning as a means of carrying it out, based largely on the traditions of the Prophet, peace be upon him.

Whether exactly stoning could be any better or worse than something like electrocution or hanging, either in terms of Islamic teaching or in terms of pain, I can't really say. But there is precedent there, in that stoning was an authentic method of punitive justice in the tradition of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/017.smt.html
(Chapter three onwards)

Of course you could quite fairly point out that the Prophet, peace be upon him, and his companions were not well stocked in barbiturates and you might suggest that we now have better means of putting a criminal to death.

One thing is certain. Muslims are not allowed to tamper with the Shariah or to start enacting laws based on what the popular mood dictates. If we begin to ignore aspects of our beliefs, to pick and choose what suits us according to what British or Irish or European or Saudi or Pakistani society says, then we might as well stop being Muslims, because we will be putting our beliefs aside in favour of our environment or personal interests or local politics and paradigms.
True enough, there will never be total agreement universally, and even within Islam people disagree.
But no individual, whether he is in favour of the death penalty or against it, who agrees that that stoning is an authentic punishment or who disagrees with it, ought to cast aside his opinions or beliefs for the sake of others.
The reason I say that I think stoning is authentic as part of the Shariah is that I believe it is, I understand it to be, and I cannot see the point in saying that it is otherwise any more than it would be pointless for you to agree with me when you do not.

jon1981

InFront wrote:

The_new_mr, who is also a Muslim, veers toward the opinion that the law is not part of the Shariah, so please remember that again I'm not supposing to speak on behalf of anything or anyone but my own beliefs.
Again, I'd suggest you make up your own mind about Islam, and not base your feelings on your attitude towards the beliefs of a Muslim.


Islam is a comprehensive, complete guide in every aspect of personal and family and community life, including criminal justice.
With the realization that sometimes there are bad people who do bad things, we cannot just selectively abandon the punitive aspects of justice, or take a neutral stance on responding to criminality, or let society collapse around us because we didn't want to interfere.

I'm not entirely sure Horizen if your main problem is with the death penalty or specifically with stoning, maybe you can clarify?

And I will also clarify and repeat that I'm not in favour of the death penalty, much less stoning, for just any crime or sin or whim, or where there is any doubt about the guilt of the sinner; but actually a very serious sin where there are four witnesses agreeing on all the details of a crime, in a situation where there is no doubt, and no doubt that the crime is without doubt, sufficiently serious. The Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, once said “Avoid the execution of punishments if there is doubt”.

I cannot see anything that realistically contradicts what seems to be a very strong unity on behalf of the ulema (scholars) with regard to the authenticity of the death penalty in Islam, and also the authenticity of stoning as a means of carrying it out, based largely on the traditions of the Prophet, peace be upon him.

Whether exactly stoning could be any better or worse than something like electrocution or hanging, either in terms of Islamic teaching or in terms of pain, I can't really say. But there is precedent there, in that stoning was an authentic method of punitive justice in the tradition of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/017.smt.html
(Chapter three onwards)

Of course you could quite fairly point out that the Prophet, peace be upon him, and his companions were not well stocked in barbiturates and you might suggest that we now have better means of putting a criminal to death.

One thing is certain. Muslims are not allowed to tamper with the Shariah or to start enacting laws based on what the popular mood dictates. If we begin to ignore aspects of our beliefs, to pick and choose what suits us according to what British or Irish or European or Saudi or Pakistani society says, then we might as well stop being Muslims, because we will be putting our beliefs aside in favour of our environment or personal interests or local politics and paradigms.
True enough, there will never be total agreement universally, and even within Islam people disagree.
But no individual, whether he is in favour of the death penalty or against it, who agrees that that stoning is an authentic punishment or who disagrees with it, ought to cast aside his opinions or beliefs for the sake of others.
The reason I say that I think stoning is authentic as part of the Shariah is that I believe it is, I understand it to be, and I cannot see the point in saying that it is otherwise any more than it would be pointless for you to agree with me when you do not.

If your daughter/mother/wife committed a sin "warranting" stoning, could you honestly stand over her and smash her face in with a rock? Where is your love? how does your love just suddenly go away for this person make you want to do such a thing? I can never nor do i want to imagine the terror and pain that goes through that person at that time.

InFront

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote:

I wonder about this. You may possibly know. Do the four witnesses have to have witnessed intercourse?

Yes. There cannot be any doubt. Anything else but the actual act of intercourse/penetration is not acceptable as far as I know.

There was an incident which tookplace during the ruling of Omar the second Khalifah and which is very clear about the requirements of the zina (adultery) evidence. 3 of the 4 witnesses testified against the man, describing the actual act of intercourse. When the fourth man’s turn came, he reported having seen two people in a suspicious setting. He saw what was almost deinitely intercourse, but did not see it in enough detail to guarantee a conviction. Although you might think that this testimony should be more than enough to convict the accused man and woman of zina, it wasnt. Based on the fact that the fourth testimony was not sufficiently explicit, Khalifah Omar dismissed the zina (adultery) charge.

For what sort of crimes would you consider stoning warranted?

I am not a scholar. All I am saying is that I don't consider myself in a position to contradict those within the ulema (the scholars) who prescribe the penalty for the most serious cases of adultery, and that I can understand what brings them to this conclusion.

the_new_mr

I think this thread is somehow veering on the "Is the death penalty acceptable?" side of things which is outside the scope of this thread and this forum. Just wanted to make that clear.

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote:

I wonder about this. You may possibly know. Do the four witnesses have to have witnessed intercourse?

As InFront has already said, there can be no doubt at all. All four witnesses have to have seen the actual intercourse without any question in their mind about it. That's really what makes me think that it's more a protection for the society.

If it's just "circumstantial evidence" (like sharing a cab, buying condoms etc) then you can't be sure. Like maybe they were actually planning to do it but decided not to at the last moment (which, by the way, is a good deed written in their account for resisting after actually intending to).

And back to the punishment itself, as I've already said, I don't think that stoning is penalty for adultery. InFront has already made the very important point of not adjusting your beliefs to suit others. There has to be sincerity in belief when making such a conviction and I pray that that's what I have. I just personally think that if stoning was a punishment to adultery then the Quran either would have said so or made it clear that the flogging was just for unmarried fornicators. The Arabic text doesn't make any mention of whether they should be married or not but sometimes English translations include (unmarried) in brackets or even without brackets.

I can't say 100% that I know it's not part of Islam but I just feel it isn't based on this stuff. The verse again:

Al-Nur:2
"As for the adulteress and the adulterer flog each of them with a hundred stripes, and let not compassion with them keep you from [carrying out] this law of God, if you [truly] believe in God and the Last Day; and let a group of the believers witness their chastisement."

And, on the point of "compassion for your fellow man". The verse above says "and let not compassion with them keep you from [carrying out] this law of God". I believe that God knows how someone might feel when having to carry out the punishment but if there's a law then that's that.

And, as already stated, the conditions required are so incredibly stringent that only the most careless and (let's face it) disgusting individuals will let themselves be seen in the act by four witnesses.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Thanks for that. Suppose I can stop wondering!

the_new_mr

You're welcome

DonJose

InFront wrote:

In a genuine case where the sin has been proven, where stoning is warranted

I can't believe I just read the above statement, especially from a moderator. Islam is an evil and barbaric religion and your statement confirms my belief.

Medin

DonJose wrote:

I can't believe I just read the above statement, especially from a moderator. Islam is an evil and barbaric religion and your statement confirms my belief.

No, it isn't. It's barbaric and evil when your wife sleeps with another man, and sometimes their husbands even approve it. It's barbaric when your daughter has sex when she's like 12 years old. It's evil and barbaric when husbands and fathers don't care about this. It's evil when husband are puppets and slaves in their own home, like it's the case in many non-Islamic families. When it's like in "modern" Ireland for example. This is what your country became in this sense - evil & barbaric. No more family values, or very little.

That's evil and barbaric, with no due respect.

DonJose

Medin wrote:

It's barbaric when your daughter has sex when she's like 12 years old.

How old was Mohammeds wife Aisha? Looks like you answered my question.

Medin wrote:

It's evil when husband are puppets and slaves in their own home, like it's the case in many non-Islamic families. When it's like in "modern" Ireland for example. This is what your country became in this sense - evil & barbaric. No more family values, or very little.

In Islam its OK for the man to have several wifes, isn't this adultery, not in Islam because its the men who make the rules and the women are basically puppets on strings.

InFront

DonJose wrote:

Islam is an evil and barbaric religion

In Islam its OK for the man to have several wifes, isn't this adultery, not in Islam because its the men who make the rules and the women are basically puppets on strings.

I strongly suggest you read the links, resources and FAQs sticky on the Islam forum menu. While you're there, please re-read the forum charter. Genuine questions and questioning the reasons for particular aspects of the Shariah is fine, insulting Islam, and indeed Muslims, certainly is not. So that's got to be a warning.

Medin please keep it civil, it's a Sunday evening guys. Back on topic?

DonJose

Medin wrote:

It's evil when husband are puppets and slaves in their own home, like it's the case in many non-Islamic families.

I don't understand the above statement please explain.

Medin wrote:

When it's like in "modern" Ireland for example. This is what your country became in this sense - evil & barbaric. No more family values, or very little.

Are you a woman? In Ireland women are treated equal. Women can vote, women can drive, women are allowed to work. If you dislike the freedom offered to women I suggest you reside to a Islamic country where you know your place in life.

InFront

If you want to comment on or discuss women in Islam, please use another thread to do it. It seems to me you're now starting to pick things out of the air to throw at Islam for the sake of it, please go back on topic or open a new thread. DJ, you know you've already had a warning.

Medin

InFront wrote:

I strongly suggest you read the links, resources and FAQs sticky on the Islam forum menu. While you're there, please re-read the forum charter. Genuine questions and questioning the reasons for particular aspects of the Shariah is fine, insulting Islam, and indeed Muslims, certainly is not. So that's got to be a warning.

Medin please keep it civil, it's a Sunday evening guys. Back on topic?

InFront, if I was a mod like you, Wallahi Wallahi I woudn't wait 1 sec to ban a shaytaan like DonJose. Think about it, Allah (swt) is watching.

DonJose

InFront wrote:

If you want to comment on or discuss women in Islam, please use another thread to do it. It seems to me you're now starting to pick things out of the air to throw at Islam for the sake of it, please go back on topic or open a new thread. DJ, you know you've already had a warning.

OK, went a bit of topic after reading Medins rant about "It's barbaric when your daughter has sex when she's like 12 years old", talk about putting your foot in your mouth. Anyway still shocked with your statement, "In a genuine case where the sin has been proven, where stoning is warranted". I can't believe in this day and age that this punishment is still sanctioned.

Medin

DonJose wrote:

OK, went a bit of topic after reading Medins rant about "It's barbaric when your daughter has sex when she's like 12 years old", talk about putting your foot in your mouth. Anyway still shocked with your statement, "In a genuine case where the sin has been proven, where stoning is warranted". I can't believe in this day and age that this punishment is still sanctioned.

I'm sorry DJ but obviously the foot fits, rite? That means I was saying the truth coz truth hurts.

DonJose

Medin wrote:

I'm sorry DJ but obviously the foot fits, rite? That means I was saying the truth coz truth hurts.

In regards to your remark, "It's barbaric when your daughter has sex when she's like 12 years old",
How old was Mohammeds wife Aisha?

Medin

DonJose wrote:

Hugs and cuddles

Sure DeJay, Muslims are brothers and they advise and warn each other. What do you expect?

Medin

DonJose wrote:

In regards to your remark, "It's barbaric when your daughter has sex when she's like 12 years old",
How old was Mohammeds wife Aisha?

Goin' off topic? I think you have to reposition yourself. Your question will not be answered coz:

1. It ain't sincere
2. It's not a part of this thread
3. You're not able to swallow the truth about the evils of the modern society

You answer me, or rather prove that women have EQUAL rights (here in Ireland)? Just to say that is far away from proving it, wouldn't you say?

Boston

Medin wrote:

Goin' off topic? I think you have to reposition yourself. Your question will not be answered coz:

1. It ain't sincere
2. It's not a part of this thread
3. You're not able to swallow the truth about the evils of the modern society

You answer me, or rather prove that women have EQUAL rights (here in Ireland)? Just to say that is far away from proving it, wouldn't you say?

Women have equal rights in ireland, if no mroe in certain cases. You actually don't have nearly as many rights as people think they do. Women and men however are not treated the same in all situations because they arn't the same.

You view irish males as typically being puppets and slaves in their own homes? Would you care to expand on that? Personal belief is that this situation of the husband making all the decisions and being in total control of the family unit is a bad one, and extremely bad one. Marriage should be a partnership of equals, why does one person have to be the slave/puppet to another.

the_new_mr

DonJose wrote:

Islam is an evil and barbaric religion and your statement confirms my belief.

Medin wrote:

I woudn't wait 1 sec to ban a shaytaan like DonJose.

I'm not going to let either of those comments slide. DonJose and Medin each receive a one week ban for breaking the rules in the forum charter.

DonJose:
You clearly broke rule #1. If you want to discuss Islam in a civilised manner without making such insulting remarks then you are welcome to do so. However, ranting in this manner is not allowed here. Read the forum charter and come back in a week if you wish.

And, just for the record, the topic of Aisha has been brought up here before and, in summary, the opinions are that:

1.: It's impossible to know exactly how old she was
2.: Even if she was married at a young age, the marriage wasn't consummated until a later age.

Medin:
You need to respect other people more. Just because someone is an un-believer doesn't make it okay to disrespect them in this manner and call them a shaytan.

I remind you of the story of how one of the un-believers in Mecca at the time of the Prophet Mohamed (peace be upon him) used to leave rubbish outside his door every day. One morning, when the Prophet awoke to find that no rubbish was there, he hurried to the man's house to ask if he was alright.

And a word to everyone here. Continue the discussion in a civilised manner (Bottle_of_Smoke) sets a good example.

invincibleirish

off topic i know but can i ask what what is a shaytaan?is just a word for unbeliever or what? would it be like a christian calling someone a pagan?

Boston

invincibleirish wrote:

off topic i know but can i ask what what is a shaytaan?is just a word for unbeliever or what? would it be like a christian calling someone a pagan?

Oh my, pagan and heathen are different things.

philologos

I thought kufaar was the word for unbeliever...

BuffyBot

shaytaan is the Arabic word for Satan.

Dr Strange

invincibleirish wrote:

off topic i know but can i ask what what is a shaytaan?is just a word for unbeliever or what? would it be like a christian calling someone a pagan?

As far as I know it means "Satan, devil, etc." Could be wrong though.

EDIT: Too late, BB was quicker.

invincibleirish

bit harsh no coming onto a forum and calling someone satan?

Boston

and a ban was handed out, nuff said. Back on topic already.

6th

MooseJam wrote:

So what are all your opinions of stoning to death and Islam, the internet being what is is I've been unfortunate enough to view both children and adults ( women of course) being stoned to death

I've been on the internet for 15 years and I have never seen anyone getting stoned to death - must be something to do with the fact that I wouldnt go looking for it.

The fact that you have found it and watched it says alot. Even if you came across it be accident you still have the choice of not looking at it.

Call Me Jimmy

Hobbes wrote:

But whats the difference between stoning or hanging/injection/electrocution that *western* methods use. Are we somehow more human in how we kill others?

You think stoning is equally humane as lethal injection? Also, in those instances, or in the 'west', people are executed if they are proven to be a definate threat to society, an adulterer is hardly a threat to society?

Boston

Lethal injections can go horribly wrong, and the electric chiar was used for a long long time. As for the "Threat to society" that just a difference of degrees.

Boston

Someone on feedback who is to afraid to post here asks

What if someone was caught for adultery but didn't believe in the Muslim faith or was an athiest?

wes

Very much against the death penalty in anything but the most heinous crimes (multiple murders etc) and even then used sparingly. Also, I think modern methods should be used rather than stoning. No need to be any more brutal than necessary, I think lethal injection is the best one currently available.

Not really a fan of the death penalty, as its possible to execute an innocent person. However, there are cases where I think it has to be used such as I suggested above heinous crimes.

Sangre

Stoning, a violent outlet for the sexually repressed savages in a society. An act of barbarians and animals. To think someone could physically pick up a stone and hurl it at the head of someone who cannot defend themselves (just for adultery) makes me nauseous. Its not a death penalty, its a public torturing.

Boston

Edit: Sorry thought this was the feedback thread.

Agreed with Sangre completely.

Death penalty should be only used to prevent more lifes being lost, not as a punishment.

Sangre

Good thing I didn't then.

Boston

Yea sorry, thought it was the other thread, half asleep.