Malaysian nurse to be caned for drinking alcohol

Filan

Under the country's Sharia law, it's obscene I feel. A nurse being whipped for having a beer, because a 6th century Arab said it was wrong. Barbaric and distressing. Ireland isn't the world's greatest country, but at least I don't risk being flogged for going to the pub tonight. Poor woman.

Iwasfrozen

Filan wrote: »

Under the country's Sharia law, it's obscene I feel. A nurse being whipped for having a beer, because a 6th century Arab said it was wrong. Barbaric and distressing. Ireland isn't the world's greatest country, but at least I don't risk being flogged for going to the pub tonight. Poor woman.

And what, pray tell, do you think gives you the right to define another countries laws as "Barbaric" and "Distressing" that women knew the laws of here country and their punishments yet she choose to break them.

CPT. SURF

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

And what, pray tell, do you think gives you the right to define another countries laws as "Barbaric" and "Distressing" that women knew the laws of here country and their punishments yet she choose to break them.

Freedom of speech gives that poster the right to define another international state's laws as whatever he/she wants. A right that is incidentally not offered by Malaysia.

nyarlothothep

some laws can be retarded, some aspects of a culture equally so.

Filan

Its really astonishes me at the influence a 6th century Arab has 1400 years on, who people believed when he said God spoke to him........Religion has retarded many aspects of civilisation, like stimigatising and at times persecuting homosexuals, pigs, women, even dying hair black (forbidden in some schools of Islam) God you'd think would have bigger concerns.

Iwasfrozen

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

And what, pray tell, do you think gives you the right to define another countries laws as "Barbaric" and "Distressing" that women knew the laws of here country and their punishments yet she choose to break them.

You cannot honestly condone the punishment follows the breaking of a, quite simply, dogmatic and barbaric law? The laws are barbaric and distressing, infact they're not only that, they're idiotic.

CPT. SURF wrote:

Freedom of speech gives that poster the right to define another international state's laws as whatever he/she wants. A right that is incidentally not offered by Malaysia.

A yes, but there is no freedom of speech on boards.ie!

irish_bob

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

And what, pray tell, do you think gives you the right to define another countries laws as "Barbaric" and "Distressing" that women knew the laws of here country and their punishments yet she choose to break them.

another one of the moral equivalence all cultures are equal left wing loon bags in the house i see

Iwasfrozen

JammyDodger wrote:

You cannot honestly condone the punishment follows the breaking of a, quite simply, dogmatic and barbaric law? The laws are barbaric and distressing, infact they're not only that, they're idiotic.

Yes I do condone her punishment, whether it is brutal or not she knew the law and broke it.
There is nothing that can give any citizen of Ireland the right to attack the judicional system of another country.

Irish Bob. wrote:

Another one of the moral equivalence all cultures are equal left wing loon bags in the house i see.

You don't seem to like grammer do you Irish bob ? Anyway I'm actually quite right wing.

Filan

If criticism was not permitted, reform could not occur. Legal does not necessarily equate to right. I've the right to criticise whoever and whatever I like. Nobody is obliged to agree with me,but I have that right to express my opinion, that is denied to the citizens of Malaysia and many others states.

Likewise others have the right to critiicise me and whoever else they want, either rightly or wrongly,everyone is entitled to express their opinion.

cnocbui

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

And what, pray tell, do you think gives you the right to define another countries laws as "Barbaric" and "Distressing" that women knew the laws of here country and their punishments yet she choose to break them.

We all have every right to have a personal definition of barbarism. Mohammad, you know, the Quoran guy, having sex with his 9 year old wife fits the bill for me, as does caning a model for drinking alcohol and innumerable events that regularly take place in Saudi Arabia.

Whether barbarism is legally sanctioned or carried out as official routine makes no difference to it being barbaric.

994

Mohammad lived in the 7th century, not the 6th. And in Malaysia, men are routinely caned for a wide variety of crimes, while caning of women is extremely rare. But who cares about men?

Iwasfrozen

cnocbui wrote: »

We all have every right to have a personal definition of barbarism. Mohammad, you know, the Quoran guy, having sex with his 9 year old wife fits the bill for me, as does caning a model for drinking alcohol and innumerable events that regularly take place in Saudi Arabia.

I don't see what Islam has to do with the discussion.

Filan wrote:

If criticism was not permitted, reform could not occur. Legal does not necessarily equate to right. I've the right to criticise whoever and whatever I like. Nobody is obliged to agree with me,but I have that right to express my opinion, that is denied to the citizens of Malaysia and many others states.

And what makes you think that the Malaysian people want the law changed ?
Shira law is after all the law described in the Quran, do you have any evidence that proves the desire for reform in malaysia ? Indeed I believe this woman shouted down protests by Amnesty international and agreed to carry out the punishment.

Filan

Actually Muhammand lived in the 7th and 6th! century:)...born around 560, died around 635 or 6..The psychiatric profession have labels for many religous figures, and with good reason....

CPT. SURF

So you have given up on asking people why they think they have the right to criticize another state's laws, probably because they are clearly free to do so. Good, now the fun stuff.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

And what makes you think that the Malaysian people want the law changed ?

What evidence do you have that the Malaysian citizenry have an actively democratic role in their legal system? Is debate, criticism, and dissent encouraged so that the system flourishes into an accurate representation of the Malaysian citizenry's idea of justice and how their legal system ought to work?

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Shira law is after all the law described in the Quran, do you have any evidence that proves the desire for reform in malaysia ?

Again, is reform and debate encouraged in Malaysia? If not, then should it be?

cnocbui

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Yes I do condone her punishment, whether it is brutal or not she knew the law and broke it.
There is nothing that can give any citizen of Ireland the right to attack the judicional system of another country.

Oh really?

Does the name Atefeh Rajabi Sahaaleh ring any bells for you?

How about Delara Darabi?

Or the unnamed Saudi girl who was gang raped then sentenced to 90 lashes? She appealed and the court increased it to 200 lashes, simply because she had the temerity to appeal.

All these were due legal process and all can be fairly labeled as acts of barbarism and as such constitute appropriate targets for criticism by anyone who feels so inclined.

cnocbui

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

I don't see what Islam has to do with the discussion.

That doesn't surprise me.

And what makes you think that the Malaysian people want the law changed ?

how about...

Bar Council president Ragunath Kesavan, in an immediate reaction today, called on the authorities to overturn the sentence of whipping.

He said there are compelling reasons to overturn the sentence as there is serious doubt over the legality and propriety of the Kuantan Syariah High Court's imposition of a supplementary sentence of imprisonment simply for the sake of carrying out the whipping.

He also urged the government to reject whipping as a form of sentencing for any offence and to abolish it altogether.

http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/legal/general_news/caning_put_off.html

That do you?

Iwasfrozen

CPT. SURF wrote: »

So you have given up on asking people why they think they have the right to criticize another state's laws, probably because they are clearly free to do so. Good, now the fun stuff.

I haven't "given that up" and can you point to me how it is clear that an Irish citizen can attack another countries constitution ?

CPT. SURF wrote: »

What evidence do you have that the Malaysian citizenry have an actively democratic role in their legal system? Is debate, criticism, and dissent encouraged so that the system flourishes into an accurate representation of the Malaysian citizenry's idea of justice and how their legal system ought to work?

Do you have any evidence that Irish people have an active role in our legal system ?

cnocbui wrote:

Does the name Atefeh Rajabi Sahaaleh ring any bells for you?

Yes but I fail to see the realivence of an Iranian woman.

cnocbui wrote:

How about Delara Darabi?

Iranian again.

cnocbui wrote:

Or the unnamed Saudi girl who was gang raped then sentenced to 90 lashes? She appealed and the court increased it to 200 lashes, simply because she had the temerity to appeal.

Well she is Saudi isn't she ?

conocbui wrote:

http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/legal...g_put_off.html

That do you?

Nope, I said Malaysian people.
Showing a high profile opponent of caneing only shows that protest is allowed in malaysian.

irish_bob

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Yes I do condone her punishment, whether it is brutal or not she knew the law and broke it.
There is nothing that can give any citizen of Ireland the right to attack the judicional system of another country.

You don't seem to like grammer do you Irish bob ? Anyway I'm actually quite right wing.

im pretty laid back when it comes to grammar , not so when it comes to religously motivated law enforcement

Iwasfrozen

irish_bob wrote: »

im pretty laid back when it comes to grammar , not so when it comes to religously motivated law enforcement

And if the majority of the populace subscribes to that same religously motivated law enforcement ? Are you laid back then ?

cnocbui

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Yes but I fail to see the realivence of an Iranian woman.

Iranian again.

Well she is Saudi isn't she ?

Nope, I said Malaysian people.
Showing a high profile opponent of caneing only shows that protest is allowed in malaysian.

relevance, caning, Malaysia.

The relevance of the Iranian and Saudi women I mentioned is that they were/are human beings who were barbarically treated by what passes for 'judicial' systems in their own countries.

you said;

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

And what, pray tell, do you think gives you the right to define another countries laws as "Barbaric
...

There is nothing that can give any citizen of Ireland the right to attack the judicional system of another country.

You asked what could give a resident of Ireland the right to define lawful acts in other countries - that's countries plural, not just Malaysia - as barbaric or to attack and criticise the legal systems in other countries. Again plural.

Since you were referring to all countries other than Ireland, it was entirely appropriate for me to furnish examples taken from any country I chose to.

Amalgam

I thought Malaysia was 'half and half' that it had a sizeable non-Muslim population also.. and that the justice system reflected that position?

irish_bob

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

And if the majority of the populace subscribes to that same religously motivated law enforcement ? Are you laid back then ?

no , the majority do not have the right to be wrong , i told the house already , i dont buy into the all cultures are equal bull plop

Dudess

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

And what, pray tell, do you think gives you the right to define another countries laws as "Barbaric" and "Distressing"

Um... because they are? And that's genuinely how people feel?
And the woman knew the punishment she was in for yet broke the law - I fail to see how that somehow reduces the barbarity of the punishment.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Yes I do condone her punishment, whether it is brutal or not she knew the law and broke it.

But it is still brutal.

There is nothing that can give any citizen of Ireland the right to attack the judicional system of another country.

Isn't there? Where did you pull that one from?

994 wrote: »

in Malaysia, men are routinely caned for a wide variety of crimes

... but not for crimes as trivial as those for which women are caned. This is Sharia Law we're talking about.

Defending hideous practices because "it's their culture/constitution" really angers me. Where do you draw the line, Iwasfrozen? Because it could be argued it applies to North Korea.

Milk & Honey

It is only six strokes! With a light rattan cane!. She will hardly feel it. She did not appeal and wants it carried out in public. Her father supports this. The whole thing smacks of a set-up.

994

Dudess wrote: »

... but not for crimes as trivial as those for which women are caned. This is Sharia Law we're talking about.

A man who drank alcohol would be caned too, and he would receive it on the bare buttocks, while women get it on the clothed back. You needn't assume that Shari'a is always crueller to men than for women - for example, a man who leaves Islam is put to death, but a woman who does so is imprisoned until she repents.

Amalgam

Clothed back is just as bad, probably worse than a bare buttocks. It opens your Renal system, kidneys etc, up to a risk of damage.

994 wrote: »

..for example, a man who leaves Islam is put to death, but a woman who does so is imprisoned until she repents.

Apostacy puts any person, regardless of gender, at a great risk of being attacked\killed.

Boskowski

Filan wrote: »

Its really astonishes me at the influence a 6th century Arab has 1400 years on, who people believed when he said God spoke to him........Religion has retarded many aspects of civilisation, like stimigatising and at times persecuting homosexuals, pigs, women, even dying hair black (forbidden in some schools of Islam) God you'd think would have bigger concerns.

Ye, agreed. Same can be said about some 0th century jew who people believed to be the actual son of god.

Boskowski

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

You cannot honestly condone the punishment follows the breaking of a, quite simply, dogmatic and barbaric law? The laws are barbaric and distressing, infact they're not only that, they're idiotic.

Not arguing with you really. But I wonder if people had a point who argued that it would be rather more barbaric seeing women (or man as a matter of fact) to be drinking in a pub until they fall around the place and then starting to get sick in public places or having fights or making babies all the while they're too pissed to even remember their names?

I'm not a muslim I'm not a reactionary and I don't think that this is a good law. Just throwing this out there.

irishconvert

Filan wrote: »

Its really astonishes me at the influence a 6th century Arab has 1400 years on, who people believed when he said God spoke to him........Religion has retarded many aspects of civilisation, like stimigatising and at times persecuting homosexuals, pigs, women, even dying hair black (forbidden in some schools of Islam) God you'd think would have bigger concerns.

Before Muhammed Arabs were complete barbarians, for example if their wife had a daughter they would bury it alive as they just wanted to have sons. Muhammed changed all that, he was a very positive infulence on that part of the world.

irishconvert

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

The laws are barbaric and distressing, infact they're not only that, they're idiotic.

What is so idiotic about it? They believe that the consumption of alcohol is bad for soicety and family life so they have banned it. They have a democratically elected Government and have an mandate from the people to implement these laws. What exactly is the problem with that?

Boskowski

irishconvert wrote: »

Before Muhammed Arabs were complete barbarians, for example if their wife had a daughter they would bury it alive as they just wanted to have sons. Muhammed changed all that, he was a very positive infulence on that part of the world.

Unlike in some other countries where you could accuse someone of being heretic or having a pact with the devil or whatever and then the semi-state religious body would torture you to death a bit with all sorts of creative machines and instruments before they finally burn you alive.

Whatever about today, but I'd be rather careful accusing other cultures of practicing religious barbarism centuries ago...

irishconvert

cnocbui wrote: »

Mohammad, you know, the Quoran guy, having sex with his 9 year old wife fits the bill for me.

The ignorance of some people really makes me dispare. These stories about Prophet Muhammed marrying Aisha when she was 9 (or 12) are complete bull****.

cnocbui wrote: »

Oh really?

Does the name Atefeh Rajabi Sahaaleh ring any bells for you?

How about Delara Darabi?

Or the unnamed Saudi girl who was gang raped then sentenced to 90 lashes? She appealed and the court increased it to 200 lashes, simply because she had the temerity to appeal.

All these were due legal process and all can be fairly labeled as acts of barbarism and as such constitute appropriate targets for criticism by anyone who feels so inclined.

Saudi Arabia don't enforce Islamic law as it should be. In my opinion the Saudi rules are a bunch of corrupt dictators. Let me tell you the Saudi people are not happy being ruled by theis Saulot. Incidentalldi royal family are backed by the US and UK, the countries who claim to bring democracy to the world.

Filan

Apparently many women in time of Mohammad were very free, I've read that it's propaganda that women's situation improved under the stewardhip of Islam. As for Arabia during his era, well he wasn't executed for forming a new religion, the Meccans could have,what would happen today to apostates?.

I'm not saying that all Muslims are bad, most Muslims are fundamentally decent, but Sharia law is to be frank barbaric. It's origins are so weak it's staggering, a 6th/7th century Arab who believed God was speaking to him. I've also met people who believed that God spoke to them.

Pace2008

And what, pray tell, do you think gives you the right to define another countries laws as "Barbaric" and "Distressing" that women knew the laws of here country and their punishments yet she choose to break them.

The fact that I live in society that had a comparably barbaric set of beliefs a few hundred years ago, but whose legal system has evolved over the years to be based around what people actually perceive as being right or wrong, not the constraints of some ancient piece of convoluted text.

irishconvert wrote: »

What is so idiotic about it? They believe that the consumption of alcohol is bad for soicety and family life so they have banned it. They have a democratically elected Government and have an mandate from the people to implement these laws. What exactly is the problem with that?

This rubbish again. You have it the wrong way around. Do you think that it's right? Do you think that consuming alcohol as an adult is on offence worthy of corporal punishment? That's what you should be concerned with; there's no such thing as objective morality. If you think it's wrong that's what matters; **** what the Malaysian government and their dated laws say.

cnocbui

irishconvert wrote: »

The ignorance of some people really makes me dispare. These stories about Prophet Muhammed marrying Aisha when she was 9 (or 12) are complete bull****.

Well then, I am sure you can go and correct the wikipedia entry on the topic:

Aisha stayed in her parents' home for several years until she joined Muhammad and the marriage was consummated.[1][3][4][5][6][7] Most of the sources indicate that she was nine years old at the time, with the single exception of al-Tabari, who records that she was ten.[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisha

Off you go.

There are numerous historical sources - hadiths - quoted here which all state the marriage was consumated when she was 9:

http://muslimhope.com/AishaNine.htm

Do show the world the historical sources you have uncovered that contradict the accepted sources. I am sure many a Muslim scholar will welcome your contribution.

Saudi Arabia don't enforce Islamic law as it should be. In my opinion the Saudi rules are a bunch of corrupt dictators. Let me tell you the Saudi people are not happy being ruled by theis Saulot. Incidentalldi royal family are backed by the US and UK, the countries who claim to bring democracy to the world.

Well that makes judicial barbarity in Saudi Arabia ok then, we now have a reasonable explanation for it so the 200 lashes wont have hurt the girl a bit. I am sure she will thank you for making it all better.

That just leaves the actions of Iran to explain away.

irishconvert

cnocbui wrote: »

Well then, I am sure you can go and correct the wikipedia entry on the topic:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisha

Off you go.

There are numerous historical sources - hadiths - quoted here which all state the marriage was consumated when she was 9:

http://muslimhope.com/AishaNine.htm

Do show the world the historical sources you have uncovered that contradict the accepted sources. I am sure many a Muslim scholar will welcome your contribution.

Well that makes judicial barbarity in Saudi Arabia ok then, we now have a reasonable explanation for it so the 200 lashes wont have hurt the girl a bit. I am sure she will thank you for making it all better.

That just leaves the actions of Iran to explain away.

MuslimHope.com - are u having a laugh, this site is run by an American Christian who openly states the aim of the site is to convince Muslims to "leave Islam and turn to our Missah, Jesus" where they will be "saved through the precious blood of Jesus"

Wikipedia - can be edited by anybody, not trustworthy

Iwasfrozen

Pace2008 wrote: »

The fact that I live in society that had a comparably barbaric set of beliefs a few hundred years ago, but whose legal system has evolved over the years to be based around what people actually perceive as being right or wrong, not the constraints of some ancient piece of convoluted text.

You still haven't told me why you have the right to question another countries mandate and constitution.

Pace2008 wrote: »

This rubbish again. You have it the wrong way around. Do you think that it's right? Do you think that consuming alcohol as an adult is on offence worthy of corporal punishment? That's what you should be concerned with; there's no such thing as objective morality. If you think it's wrong that's what matters; **** what the Malaysian government and their dated laws say.

One could say that you have it the wrong way around, it doesn't matter what we think as we are not malaysian are we ? The only people who matter are the malaysian people from whom the elected government draws it's mandate, that's called Democracy.

Milk & Honey

That woman stands to make a fortune out of this. Chat show appearances, books etc. It is a complete scam.

DublinWriter

The Qu'ran only states that alcohol should not be consumed whilst praying.

irishconvert

DublinWriter wrote: »

The Qu'ran only states that alcohol should not be consumed whilst praying.

Not true. Read this http://letusaddvalue.blogspot.com/2009/08/what-does-quran-says-about-alcohol.html

cnocbui

irishconvert wrote: »

MuslimHope.com - are u having a laugh, this site is run by an American Christian who openly states the aim of the site is to convince Muslims to "leave Islam and turn to our Missah, Jesus" where they will be "saved through the precious blood of Jesus"

The purpose of the site or it's author is irrelevant. What is of relevance is whether the detailed and referenced quoting of sources is accurate or not.

There is even a detailed bibliography of sources at the foot of the page.

Wikipedia - can be edited by anybody, not trustworthy

Wikipedia has consistently been found to be accurate and trustworthy - more so than some other encyclopaedias.

cnocbui

Milk & Honey wrote: »

That woman stands to make a fortune out of this. Chat show appearances, books etc. It is a complete scam.

I agree. The topic title refers to her as a nurse, but a Malaysian site I quoted referred to her as a model. I think she may be after a bit of publicity.

Filan

She is a nurse but was previously a part-time model. I'm just appaled that someone could be physicaly punished for drinking alcohol. Islamic doctrine scares me.

I know people who in psychotic states believed God spoke to them, but nobody believes them, why did they believe Mohammad?.

Milk & Honey

How come there was nobig outcry about this incident?
A description by Associated Press:
Aussie teens caned in K.L.

Two Australian teenaged girls were caned and deported recently in the Malaysian capital of Kuala Lumpur. The two, both aged seventeen, pleaded guilty to possession of a small quantity of a controlled substance, marijuana. Both claimed ignorance of the law as their defense. Whilst the corporal punishment of adult females is not permitted in Malaysia, juveniles under age eighteen of both sexes may be awarded canings for certain offences at the discretion of courts. A lighter cane is used in these instances than the type of cane used with adult males. The illegal drug was discovered in the girls' hotel room by a maid who reported her find to the hotel manager. The police were called and the two were arrested upon their return to the hotel. They were charged with the possession and brought before a magistrate who accepted their guilty plea before sentencing them to be caned and then deported immediately. Each girl received eight strokes. Upon arrival at the Melbourne airport, one of the girls gave an account of their ordeal for Australian radio.

"We were taken to a police station and escorted by three policewomen into some kind of office. There were metal filing cabinets and a chair in the middle of the floor. A fourth policewoman was waiting there with a cane. The cane was quite thin like at school but a bit longer. We were pretty scared. The policewoman with the cane smiled at us and asked which one of us wanted to be first. I volunteered. I just wanted it to be over with. I was told to take off my dress and pantyhose and bend over the chair. While I was doing this she was taking practice swings with the cane. One of the other policewomen came over and held my wrists while I was bent over. The caning started and I screamed blue bloody murder. I didn't think anything could hurt that much."

A doctor who examined both girls two days after the canings stated that visible raised weals and abrasions consistent with severe caning were present on the buttocks and legs of both girls. The parents appealed to the Australian government, however a government spokesperson said that no action was planned. A source in Kuala Lumpur stated that such punishment was expected in Malaysia and that the girls had been treated leniently. A local youth had recently received twelve strokes for the same offence, said the source.

http://members.internettrash.com/rolfbmiller/engl-zuech.html

getz

Pace2008 wrote: »

The fact that I live in society that had a comparably barbaric set of beliefs a few hundred years ago, but whose legal system has evolved over the years to be based around what people actually perceive as being right or wrong, not the constraints of some ancient piece of convoluted text.

This rubbish again. You have it the wrong way around. Do you think that it's right? Do you think that consuming alcohol as an adult is on offence worthy of corporal punishment? That's what you should be concerned with; there's no such thing as objective morality. If you think it's wrong that's what matters; **** what the Malaysian government and their dated laws say.

the daft thing about these so called islamic religious countries that believe drinking alcohol is a islamic sin,is that most of them are wine producers,even malaysia.

Dades

If prohibition was applied consistently in Malaysia, then there is at least a case for some form of punishment.

The fact is that any Westerner can walk into the Hard Rock Cafe in KL and get hammered. So exists the double standard that a Muslim woman will be caned for having a beer, whilst the government will happily take tourist dollars for Westerners doing the same.

I don't feel too sorry for the two aussie girls caught with hash, tbh. Anyone caught with drugs in South East Asia is due a slap for pure stupidity in my book - given the notorious nature of the treatment drug carriers get out there.

getz

Dades wrote: »

If prohibition was applied consistently in Malaysia, then there is at least a case for some form of punishment.

The fact is that any Westerner can walk into the Hard Rock Cafe in KL and get hammered. So exists the double standard that a Muslim woman will be caned for having a beer, whilst the government will happily take tourist dollars for Westerners doing the same.

I don't feel too sorry for the two aussie girls caught with hash, tbh. Anyone caught with drugs in South East Asia is due a slap for pure stupidity in my book - given the notorious nature of the treatment drug carriers get out there.

yes and christian malaysians can also drink-so if your muslim, you can not,but if you are of any other religion you can ,crazy

Irishcrx

I don't get the mentality of this at all, beating people , torturing them some of these countries really need to cop on in this day and age.

We are all born free , that is taken within 5 minutes of birth from us unfortunatly, it's like people just make these laws to force their own views on people and it still happens in modern society, ok we may not be whipped here in Ireland but we do still have nanny state laws that take away peoples rights.

irishconvert

getz wrote: »

yes and christian malaysians can also drink-so if your muslim, you can not,but if you are of any other religion you can ,crazy

As a Muslim one is not supposed to drink Alcohol, or profit from the sale of it. So if they were to follow Sharia law by the book the Government should be caning themselves for profiting from allowing alcohol to be sold. They are a bit hypocritical.

Irishcrx wrote: »

I don't get the mentality of this at all, beating people , torturing them some of these countries really need to cop on in this day and age.

We are all born free , that is taken within 5 minutes of birth from us unfortunatly, it's like people just make these laws to force their own views on people and it still happens in modern society, ok we may not be whipped here in Ireland but we do still have nanny state laws that take away peoples rights.

Sounds to me like you want to force your views on the people of Malaysia.

Filan

People are entitled to their religous views but they should be private. If you want to believe that God spoke to a 6th/7th century Arab fine, but to try to impose his doctrine on others, never mind beating them if they don't adhere is simply wrong and barbaric. It never ceases to amaze me how many Muslims defend stoning and various other capital punishments.

Dudess

It amazes me even more how so many right-on westerners do...

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

You still haven't told me why you have the right to question another countries mandate and constitution.

Why hasn't (s)he that right?