Capital punishment in Saudi

The Browser

Firstly, I know that Saudi Arabia does not equal Islam, and I know that there are some open, globalized, and tolerant Muslim countries, such as the UAE, which is where I live.

But I'd like to ask Muslim posters here about their opinions of the death penalty in Saudi on Sharia grounds. Do you agree with applying Sharia to sentence people to death for sorcery, adultery, and apostasy, for instance?

I would also like to share with Muslim posters here a very consistent experience that I have had with Muslims in the UAE regarding this topic of the death penalty in Saudi. Most Muslims who I know in Dubai reject the statement that Saudi executes people for witchcraft and assure me that whatever I've heard isn't true. I'd like to know why so many Muslims say this. Maybe this last question is unanswerable; but it's a definite trend that I have noticed when conversing with Muslims in this part of the world and I was hoping you guys could provide some insights.

Thanks.

booom

....I'm quite surprised there hasn't been a more vocal response to this (in my view) interesting question from regular posters who are more often than not very helpful when it comes to explaining the nuances of the Islamic faith.

The Browser

booom wrote: »

....I'm quite surprised there hasn't been a more vocal response to this (in my view) interesting question from regular posters who are more often than not very helpful when it comes to explaining the nuances of the Islamic faith.

Me too.

malibu4u

booom wrote: »

....I'm quite surprised there hasn't been a more vocal response to this (in my view) interesting question from regular posters who are more often than not very helpful when it comes to explaining the nuances of the Islamic faith.

me too. And is it true than Christian churches are not allowed build at all in Saudi Arabia?

The Browser

malibu4u wrote: »

me too. And is it true than Christian churches are not allowed build at all in Saudi Arabia?

I'd like to keep this discussion solely about the use of Sharia to justify the death penalty for mentioned "crimes".

Churches are a different matter.

OCorcrainn

I don't why you are surprised by the lack of responses to this good question considering this forum. I expected nothing else but for it to be deliberately ignored.

KerryIslamKIOS

The Browser wrote: »

Firstly, I know that Saudi Arabia does not equal Islam, and I know that there are some open, globalized, and tolerant Muslim countries, such as the UAE, which is where I live.

But I'd like to ask Muslim posters here about their opinions of the death penalty in Saudi on Sharia grounds. Do you agree with applying Sharia to sentence people to death for sorcery, adultery, and apostasy, for instance?

I would also like to share with Muslim posters here a very consistent experience that I have had with Muslims in the UAE regarding this topic of the death penalty in Saudi. Most Muslims who I know in Dubai reject the statement that Saudi executes people for witchcraft and assure me that whatever I've heard isn't true. I'd like to know why so many Muslims say this. Maybe this last question is unanswerable; but it's a definite trend that I have noticed when conversing with Muslims in this part of the world and I was hoping you guys could provide some insights.

Thanks.

First you mentioned ...

Firstly, I know that Saudi Arabia does not equal Islam... Once you know it then I do not see any point to answer it as you are right that Saudi Arabia do not follow Islamic laws. Its a fact including banning women driver mate.

Secondly, some open, globalized, and tolerant Muslim countries, such as the UAE !! my answer is .. good one !!

At this moment of time, there is no islamic country exist which follow islamic laws as each country is abusing minority vs gender rights. Death sentence is controversial as well . Punishment of apostasy has been discussed in previous thread here. Sorcery punishment of death!! never heard of it except on the news few months back and certainly not many infact none of other countries follow that. Saudi Arabia is a kingdom not a country. Read the history of it please . Look at Iran, a fascist regime is there suppressing human rights and meddling in Syria etc.

KerryIslamKIOS

malibu4u wrote: »

me too. And is it true than Christian churches are not allowed build at all in Saudi Arabia?

Same reason which does not allow to build a mosque in Vatican! Why Vatican do not allow mosques to be build up?

Any other place in the muslim world if its not allowed then its wrong.

Tom Dunne

KerryIslamKIOS wrote: »

Same reason which does not allow to build a mosque in Vatican! Why Vatican do not allow mosques to be build up?

I think it is quite disingenuous to compare a country of two square miles to a country of 870,000 square miles.

KerryIslamKIOS

Tom Dunne wrote: »

I think it is quite disingenuous to compare a country of two square miles to a country of 870,000 square miles.

Principles should not be based on sq miles or billions of people mate. You can agree or disagree its your choice.

Peace to you and your family!

toomevara

The Saudi regime is an utterly appalling one and its oil-money fuelled peddling of fundamentalist wahabbism is one of the major issues facing Islam at the moment. Essentially they are a corrupt, dynastic dictatorship who will use any methods at their disposal to remain in power. One can only hope that the people of Saudi can initiate some kind of arab spring of their own. I am not a muslim, though I have visited many muslim countries and have been something of a student of Islam for many years (prior I might add to all this post 9/11 hysteria).

The vast majority of muslims in my direct experience abhor the Saudi regime and its appalling actions and fundamentalisms. You ask any modern muslim woman what they think about the Saudis attitudes to female drivers and you wont be long finding out what kind of esteem the Saudis are held in generally. Hard cases make tough law and its the same when it comes to the appalling house of Saud. I guess it's similar to viewing Christianity through the prism of fundamentalist Baptists in the deep south of the states or ultra-montane catholics from the Vatican. Sharia law, and discussion of it, tends to illicit hysteria particularly in the west where sharia law means beheadings, stonings and amputations but of course it is generally far more mundane that that and when administered by temperate moderate muslims who remember the fundamental injunction of the prophet, pbuh, that justice MUST be tempered with mercy, effective.

But to answer the OP's original question, the vast, vast majority of muslims are as appalled as you and I are by the barbarities routinely practiced by the saudi regime.

The Browser

I have met Saudis in Dubai. Generally we didn't discuss sensitive topics. But I am under the distinct impression that the law is the way it is in Saudi because that is exactly what the Saudi masses want.

And being honest, the vast majority of Muslims that I've met in Dubai have a soft spot for Saudi and are quick to defend it from criticism or simply say "it's not as you describe".

Tom Dunne

The Browser wrote: »

I have met Saudis in Dubai. Generally we didn't discuss sensitive topics. But I am under the distinct impression that the law is the way it is in Saudi because that is exactly what the Saudi masses want.

And being honest, the vast majority of Muslims that I've met in Dubai have a soft spot for Saudi and are quick to defend it from criticism or simply say "it's not as you describe".

In my experience, from speaking with people who have actually been to Saudi/go on a regular basis, it is actually the opposite. The impression I get is that the vast majority of people do not approve of the strict interpretation of Islam that is present in the country and want to change. I had a conversation recently with a local here who told me that even the ruling family in Saudi are relatively liberal and want to change, it's just that they are trying to keep the balance between the population at large and the clerics. Don't rock the boat, essentially.

I read an article recently (must see if I can dig it out) in a journal that suggested both Saudi and the general Gulf region, governments essentially buy their population's acquiescence through generous handouts and subsidies. Hence why you will never see an Arab Spring in the Gulf region (Bahrain being the only difference, but that's a whole other situation, given its Shia/Sunni demographic, unique to that country).

toomevara

The Browser wrote: »

And being honest, the vast majority of Muslims that I've met in Dubai have a soft spot for Saudi and are quick to defend it from criticism or simply say "it's not as you describe".

Totally defer to your superior knowledge RE: the gulf. I've mostly been to North Africa and the mid-East and I've lived in Leeds/London with many muslim friends. I would say, in these places ,the view of the House of Saud is at best jaundiced. One of the major complaints I've heard is the way in which the Saudis are systematically destroying the historical and archaeological heritage of early Islam as it doesn't gel with their own twisted interpretation and the way in which saudi money is used to undermine local, moderate versions of Islam.

The Browser

Tom Dunne wrote: »

The impression I get is that the vast majority of people do not approve of the strict interpretation of Islam that is present in the country and want to change. I had a conversation recently with a local here who told me that even the ruling family in Saudi are relatively liberal and want to change, it's just that they are trying to keep the balance between the population at large and the clerics. Don't rock the boat, essentially.

How many clerics are there? I wonder why their opinions matter at all if the majority of both the people and the rulers want change. What gives the clerics this influence? It must be because a lot of the population like what they say.

Also, I wonder, who appoints these clerics? I know that in the UAE, clerics are very closely controlled and are kept moderate as a matter of public policy. Most of the Friday sermons are very like what you'd hear from a gentle parish priest (bar today's, which dealt with demons and fortune-telling!).

The Emiratis, btw, love the current set up and live a very good life materially. They want no trouble at all because the status quo is extraordinarily nice for them.

Tom Dunne

The Browser wrote: »

How many clerics are there? I wonder why their opinions matter at all if the majority of both the people and the rulers want change. What gives the clerics this influence? It must be because a lot of the population like what they say.

Also, I wonder, who appoints these clerics? I know that in the UAE, clerics are very closely controlled and are kept moderate as a matter of public policy. Most of the Friday sermons are very like what you'd hear from a gentle parish priest (bar today's, which dealt with demons and fortune-telling!).

That is about my limit of knowledge of the Saudi system, I don't know how they are appointed.

But I would explain the acceptance of capital punishment in the country in terms of the unquestioning nature of the people and the deference to authority, perceived or otherwise. If you have an imam who declares that the Koran dictates beheading for, say, sorcery, then nobody is going to question him and it is just carried out. And while I don't have any statistics to hand, I can't help but notice practically all the beheadings you hear of, none of them appear to be Arabs, all appear to be Asian immigrants. Another less savoury aspect of the country where such people are essentially disposable.

The Browser wrote: »

The Emiratis, btw, love the current set up and live a very good life materially. They want no trouble at all because the status quo is extraordinarily nice for them.

Yeah, I've been there a few times (love Yas Island). And I think that is the way across the region - they are essentially paid off to keep quiet and not cause any hassle.

Tom Dunne

Mistress 69 wrote: »

Building a Mosque in the Vatican would be similar to building a Catholic Church in Mecca. However Mosques exist in cities all over Europe, the largest one being in Rome. It can be seen clearly that Europeans of all religions or no religion are tolerant and respectful of Islam. The reverse is unfortunately not the case in Saudi as Catholics are not allowed openly practice their religion by law.

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

I really don't think wikipedia is a reliable source for any kind of debate. Do you have any more reputable sources?

As has been pointed out many times on this forum, Saudi Arabia is not representative of Islam. They have a pretty unique interpretation of the religion.

I live in a Muslim country and there are three Catholic churches that I am aware of, along with churches of other faiths.

Mistress 69

Tom Dunne wrote: »

I really don't think wikipedia is a reliable source for any kind of debate. Do you have any more reputable sources?

As has been pointed out many times on this forum, Saudi Arabia is not representative of Islam. They have a pretty unique interpretation of the religion.

I live in a Muslim country and there are three Catholic churches that I am aware of, along with churches of other faiths.

Hello Tom

I would be interested to hear views on the following

Definitely no Churches allowed in Saudi Arabia and the country is not unique in its interpretation of Islam, see list below.


Saudi Arabia to Keep Ban on Churches


Justice Minister Says No Truth to Reports of Planned Change

by Jason Ditz, April 24, 2013
Print This | Share This
The US-backed Saudi government has announced that it intends to continue its ban on the construction of Christian churches, and indeed a ban on all non-Muslim places of worship, despite rumors that a change was pending.
Justice Minister Mohammed al-Issa confirmed that the policy was not going to change, reiterating that the Saudi government “does not allow the establishment of non-Muslim places of worship.”
















World News<img src="/images/ajax-loader.gif" alt="Loading ..."/>
24-04-2013 12:48 Saudi Arabia forbids construction of "non-Muslim" prayer homes <img id="imgNews" src="/NewsImages/NB-86853-635023939260408410.jpg" style="width:385px;border-width:0px;"/>






Saudi Arabia's minister of Justice Mohammed bin Abdulkareem Al-Issa confirmed as he met with European parliamentarians in Brussels that his country which follows the Salafist Wahabi order will not allow prayer homes for non-Muslims on its territories.

Local news outlets quoted the Saudi minister as saying that “the cradle of Islamic civilization does not allow the establishment of other prayer homes as another symbol of worship".

Al-Issa's statements came as a response to the European parliamentarians' inquiries concerning allowing the establishment of prayer homes for other religions.

He was speaking before members of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the European parliament where he exposed the grounds of the judiciary principles of the kingdom.




Answers.com > Wiki Answers > Categories > Religion & Spirituality > Islam > What countries use Sharia Law?
Religion & Spirituality Category Guidelines

What countries use Sharia Law?



In: Islam, England URL="http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_countries_use_Sharia_Law#"][COLOR=#0066cc]Edit categories[/COLOR][/URL








Answer:

Countries using strict forms of Sharia Law include:

Death for Blasphemy:

1. Afghanistan
2. Bahrain
3. Iran
4. Mauritania
5. Oman
6. Pakistan
7. Yemen
8. Saudi Arabia
9. Gaza

Imprisonment for Blasphemy:

1. Algeria
2. Bangladesh
3. Egypt
4. Iraq
5. Kuwait
6. Libya
7. Malaysia
8. Maldives
9. Morocco
10. Somalia
11. Tunisia
12. United Arab Emirates


Nations that include some level of Sharia (leniant sentences for honour killings, ban on new churches, floggings, etc):


1. Indonesia (Flogging, Caning; Sharia applied strictly in Aceh province)
2. Turkey (Restrictions on alcohol)
3. Brunei (Caning, Alcohol is illegal)
4. Jordan (2 years or less for honour killings)
5. Eritrea (Girls as young as 8 can be married, spousal rape is not recognized)
6. Syria (1 year or less for honour killings)
7. Djibouti (Sharia law regarding divorce)
8. Chechnya (Modest dress enforced, Alcohol and gambling suppressed by local authorities)
9. Niger (girls can be married off before they reach puberty)
10. Nigeria (Sharia is enforced in the northern states)
11. Kenya (Ad Hoc Sharia enforced in the east near the border with Somalia)
12. Gambia (Sharia courts decide all family matters, including for non-Muslims)
13. Qatar (public consumption is illegal during Ramadan, Alcohol heavily restricted, blood money acceptable punishment for murder, "kafala" law which is also shared by all Gulf states but Bahrain is technically slavery)
14. Uganda (Kadhi Courts overseeing family and civil matters)




More worrying



Most Muslims want sharia law to hold sway in their countries, says survey



More than four-fifths of the 38,000 Muslims interviewed in 39 countries said non-Muslims in their countries could practise their faith freely and that this was good. Photograph: Vahid Salemi/AP

• Topics:
• News
• World
• Middle East
• Mohammad Prophet
• More Topics

Wed, May 1, 2013, 06:21
First published: Wed, May 1, 2013, 06:21

• 
  
• 
  
• More Sharing Services

Large majorities in the Muslim world want the Islamic legal and moral code of sharia as the official law in their countries, but they disagree on what it includes and who should be subject to it, an extensive new survey says.
Over three-quarters of Muslims in the Middle East and north Africa, south Asia and southeast Asia want sharia courts to decide family law issues such as divorce and property disputes, according to the Washington-based Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.
Views on punishments such as chopping off thieves’ hands or decreeing death for apostates is more evenly divided in much of the Islamic world, although more than three-quarters of Muslims in south Asia say they are justified.
Those punishments have helped make sharia controversial in some non-Islamic countries, where some critics say radical Muslims want to impose it on western societies, but the survey shows views in Muslim countries are far from monolithic.
“Muslims are not equally comfortable with all aspects of sharia,” said the study by the Washington-based Pew Forum. “Most do not believe it should be applied to non-Muslims.”
Unlike codified Western law, sharia is a loosely defined set of moral and legal guidelines based on the Koran, the sayings of Prophet Mohammad ( hadith ) and Muslim traditions. Its rules and advice cover everything from prayers to personal hygiene.
More than four-fifths of the 38,000 Muslims interviewed in 39 countries said non-Muslims in their countries could practise their faith freely and that this was good.
This view was strongest in South Asia, where 97 per cent of Bangladeshis and 96 per cent of Pakistanis agreed, while the lowest Middle Eastern result was 77 per cent in Egypt.
The survey polled only Muslims and not minorities. In several Muslim countries, embattled Christian minorities say they cannot practise their faith freely and are in fact subject to discrimination and physical attacks.

Politics and Islam
The survey produced mixed results on questions relating to the relationship between politics and Islam.
Democracy wins slight majorities in key Middle Eastern states – 54 per cent in Iraq, 55 per cent in Egypt – and falls to 29 per cent in Pakistan. By contrast, it stands at 81 per cent in Lebanon, 75 per cent in Tunisia and 70 per cent in Bangladesh.
In most countries surveyed, Muslims were more worried about Islamist extremism than any other form of religious violence.
Suicide bombing was mostly rejected, although it won 40 per cent support in the Palestinian territories, 39 per cent in Afghanistan, 29 per cent in Egypt and 26 per cent in Bangladesh.
Three-quarters say abortion is morally wrong and 80 per cent or more rejected homosexuality and sex outside of marriage. – (Reuters)



And Finally I will refrain from posting Tuesdays 21 05 2013 picture of the 5 beheaded corpses.


M69

Tom Dunne

Mistress 69 wrote: »

Hello Tom

I would be interested to hear views on the following

Definitely no Churches allowed in Saudi Arabia and the country is not unique in its interpretation of Islam, see list below.

A genuine question for you - have you been to any of the countries listed below? Aside from what you read on the internet, have you actually experienced any of these countries first hand?

If you have, you would know full well that Saudi Arabia is unique.

Mistress 69 wrote: »

Saudi Arabia to Keep Ban on Churches

I would question the bias of a website that has "Anti war" in it's title.

Mistress 69 wrote: »

What countries use Sharia Law?


Answer:

Countries using strict forms of Sharia Law include:

Death for Blasphemy:

1. Afghanistan
2. Bahrain
3. Iran
4. Mauritania
5. Oman
6. Pakistan
7. Yemen
8. Saudi Arabia
9. Gaza

One of the countries listed above is where I call home. And I can tell you that there is no strict interpretation of Sharia law, again proving my point that just because you read something on the internet, doesn't make it true.

Mistress 69 wrote: »

Imprisonment for Blasphemy:

1. Algeria
2. Bangladesh
3. Egypt
4. Iraq
5. Kuwait
6. Libya
7. Malaysia
8. Maldives
9. Morocco
10. Somalia
11. Tunisia
12. United Arab Emirates

You do know Ireland has laws against blasphemy too? Link: http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/ahern-defends-new-blasphemy-law-26532371.html

Mistress 69 wrote: »

13. Qatar (public consumption is illegal during Ramadan, Alcohol heavily restricted, blood money acceptable punishment for murder, "kafala" law which is also shared by all Gulf states but Bahrain is technically slavery)

Public consumption of any food or liquid is prohibited in all Muslim countries during Ramadan, not just Qatar. And what exactly is the quotete about Bahrain about? Quite bizarre.

Again proving my point that there is a lot of disinformation out there about Islam and Muslim countries.

Mistress 69 wrote: »

More worrying

Why is it more worrying?

Mistress 69 wrote: »

Large majorities in the Muslim world want the Islamic legal and moral code of sharia as the official law in their countries, but they disagree on what it includes and who should be subject to it, an extensive new survey says.
Over three-quarters of Muslims in the Middle East and north Africa, south Asia and southeast Asia want sharia courts to decide family law issues such as divorce and property disputes, according to the Washington-based Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.
Views on punishments such as chopping off thieves’ hands or decreeing death for apostates is more evenly divided in much of the Islamic world, although more than three-quarters of Muslims in south Asia say they are justified.
Those punishments have helped make sharia controversial in some non-Islamic countries, where some critics say radical Muslims want to impose it on western societies, but the survey shows views in Muslim countries are far from monolithic.
“Muslims are not equally comfortable with all aspects of sharia,” said the study by the Washington-based Pew Forum. “Most do not believe it should be applied to non-Muslims.”
Unlike codified Western law, sharia is a loosely defined set of moral and legal guidelines based on the Koran, the sayings of Prophet Mohammad ( hadith ) and Muslim traditions. Its rules and advice cover everything from prayers to personal hygiene.
More than four-fifths of the 38,000 Muslims interviewed in 39 countries said non-Muslims in their countries could practise their faith freely and that this was good.
This view was strongest in South Asia, where 97 per cent of Bangladeshis and 96 per cent of Pakistanis agreed, while the lowest Middle Eastern result was 77 per cent in Egypt.
The survey polled only Muslims and not minorities. In several Muslim countries, embattled Christian minorities say they cannot practise their faith freely and are in fact subject to discrimination and physical attacks.

Politics and Islam
The survey produced mixed results on questions relating to the relationship between politics and Islam.
Democracy wins slight majorities in key Middle Eastern states – 54 per cent in Iraq, 55 per cent in Egypt – and falls to 29 per cent in Pakistan. By contrast, it stands at 81 per cent in Lebanon, 75 per cent in Tunisia and 70 per cent in Bangladesh.
In most countries surveyed, Muslims were more worried about Islamist extremism than any other form of religious violence.
Suicide bombing was mostly rejected, although it won 40 per cent support in the Palestinian territories, 39 per cent in Afghanistan, 29 per cent in Egypt and 26 per cent in Bangladesh.
Three-quarters say abortion is morally wrong and 80 per cent or more rejected homosexuality and sex outside of marriage. – (Reuters)

I've highlighted some of important points.

I think it is fair to say that, yes, there are a lot of things in the statute books of some countries that we, from the West, would find utterly abhorrent. However, remember that things were also a little backward here in Ireland up to a few years back.

The death penalty was abolish in Ireland in 1990, homosexuality ceased to be illegal in 1993. Equal pay and conditions for women in the workplace were only introduced in 1973.

And one very important point that always appears to be missed - a lot of the countries you list above are Third World countries. The majority of them are still struggling with literacy and poverty since independence from their former colonial masters. Does that excuse it? Absolutely not. But it does explain it. I am sure if you looked at the laws of Western countries from the 1800's you would find similarly abhorrent laws.

Mistress 69 wrote: »

And Finally I will refrain from posting Tuesdays 21 05 2013 picture of the 5 beheaded corpses.

I am not sure what that relates to, or how it relates to our discussion, but I am sure any good Muslim would find that utterly abhorrent.

Mistress 69

Hello All

More research is necessary in order to give an informed reply, which will have to wait till after Monday due to work commitments.

Enjoy the weekend

M69

Mistress 69

Apologies for not getting back sooner. I have not been to the middle east so any knowledge I have is media based. When I read anything on Reuters or the Irish Times I accept it as true. In this instance as you are living out there I accept that you know the reality there in ways I never could.


''I am not sure what that relates to, or how it relates to our discussion, but I am sure any good Muslim would find that utterly abhorrent''

The headless 5 corpses reference relates to a public beheading of 5 men on May 21st 2013,followed by the hanging up of the bodies for all to see. As the thread is about capital punishment in Saudi I felt it was relevant. I am also sure any good Muslim would be appalled at this behaviour.

In relation to the building of Churches any internet search I do backs up what I have already said, however one search earlier today indicates there may be one Riyadh.. conflicting evidence online. On a lighter note I purchased a fantastic book called Jerusalem written by two men, one Jewish and the other a Muslim who run a top end restaurant in London. The recipes contained within are absolutely beautiful and would nearly make me take a trip to the area just to experience it first hand.

irishconvert

I agree with the death penalty for crimes such as theft. And I am not talking about someone who steals a loaf of bread. I am talking about the bankers responsible for the massive theft from the Irish Irish people. Many many ordinary Irish people have died or will die due to the sheer greed of these people. So many cutbacks in the health service will mean cancelled operations, missed diagnosis. As a result people die. The bankers responsible for this, whose only interest is getting more and more for themselves and less and less for everyone else, through manipulation and theft, do not deserve to live on this planet. Off with their heads!

There are cutbacks in the health service because banking aside we're running deficits of billions on just paying our own normal bills.
Death to bankers, most of whom are just normal employees, is rather alarming

confusedquark

Islam does not advocate capital punishment for theft - at the very most it's cutting off a hand, and even that's only when strict criteria are met (e.g. a pre-planned robbery, stealing something protected and which is above a certain value).

Bluewolf, I'm pretty sure he wasn't referring to normal bank employees, but to the fat cats at the top. The banks (and the government's subsequent ineptness at handling the mess) are THE main reason the country's in the state it's in, and they've got off completely scott free. I don't support capital punishment for their crimes, but I would like to see some form of justice - which of course won't happen.

Zombrex

irishconvert wrote: »

I agree with the death penalty for crimes such as theft. And I am not talking about someone who steals a loaf of bread. I am talking about the bankers responsible for the massive theft from the Irish Irish people. Many many ordinary Irish people have died or will die due to the sheer greed of these people. So many cutbacks in the health service will mean cancelled operations, missed diagnosis. As a result people die. The bankers responsible for this, whose only interest is getting more and more for themselves and less and less for everyone else, through manipulation and theft, do not deserve to live on this planet. Off with their heads!

The bankers weren't responsible for this. In the same way Apple and Google get out of paying taxes by simply using the current tax law, they simply took advantage of the inadequate systems governing them. Inadequate systems put in place by politicians who were elected by the general population.

While it is easy to pretend that the financial crisis was caused by bankers tricking or manipulating Joe Soap, the reality is that the bank crisis was allowed to happen by an inept and disinterested populous who elected politicians interested in short term economic boost and as such deregulated the banking sector.

We are reaping what we sowed.

So unless you are going to behead the entire country (or at least FF voters), I think you need to come up with a slightly better plan ...

Tom Dunne

Back on topic, please. This thread is about capital punishment, not the financial crisis.

Palmach

Tom Dunne wrote: »

Back on topic, please. This thread is about capital punishment, not the financial crisis.

You are incorrect in suggesting Saudi is unique. Many of the crimes punishable by death in Saudi are so punished because they are mandated in the Sharia. If you ask most Muslims they will tell you it is so. For example if you are Muslim and want to change you are religion the Koran is clear you must die. This is the Sharia and while willingness to implement this may vary the fact that it is the law of Islam does not.

confusedquark

Palmach wrote: »

For example if you are Muslim and want to change you are religion the Koran is clear you must die.

It boggles my mind how people can be so sure of something without actually bothering to look into it properly. Please quote this "clear" verse from the Koran to back up your statement.

Tom Dunne

Palmach wrote: »

You are incorrect in suggesting Saudi is unique. Many of the crimes punishable by death in Saudi are so punished because they are mandated in the Sharia. If you ask most Muslims they will tell you it is so. For example if you are Muslim and want to change you are religion the Koran is clear you must die. This is the Sharia and while willingness to implement this may vary the fact that it is the law of Islam does not.

So I ask what your experience with Muslim countries is. Have you been to one, have you any knowledge of such countries beyond what you read the media? Have you ever spoken to a Muslim scholar about such matters?

Palmach

confusedquark wrote: »

It boggles my mind how people can be so sure of something without actually bothering to look into it properly. Please quote this "clear" verse from the Koran to back up your statement.

From the Hadith not the Koran sorry. "Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him" Bukhari 9.84.57. Pastors are regularly hauled off to jail in Iran and churches closed down. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/3179465/Hanged-for-being-a-Christian-in-Iran.html

Now I know all Muslims don't think like this. I have met many who are against the idea. I have met many who have said if the Sharia was enforce then yes apostates should face the death penalty. As you can see here http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2013/04/daily-chart-20?fsrc=scn/tw/te/dc/Shariadolikeit

This has large support throughout the Islamic world. My point basically is that Saudi is not some unique aberration.

Tom Dunne wrote: »

So I ask what your experience with Muslim countries is. Have you been to one, have you any knowledge of such countries beyond what you read the media? Have you ever spoken to a Muslim scholar about such matters?

So one has to visit a Muslims country to know Islam? Does one have to be female to talk about women's issues? Does one have to have lived in China to talk about Chinese issues. I haven't discussed with a scholar no but I have met converts from Islam who fled their countries Sudan and Pakistan because they faced death. One was imprisoned and beaten up by the police. The other suffered official harassment to the point where she dropped out of college and fled.

confusedquark

Palmach wrote: »

From the Hadith not the Koran sorry. "Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him" Bukhari 9.84.57.

Indeed, not from the Koran, which leads on to my next point...

Palmach wrote: »

This is the Sharia and while willingness to implement this may vary the fact that it is the law of Islam does not.

And the converse is also true - if so-called Sharia is implemented incorrectly, then those actions cannot be taken as Islamic law. Yes, there may be a large support for the death penalty for apostasy in the Islamic world, but the majority of people will believe what's fed to them by those in charge (we're no different in the West).

I've already written a bit on the topic of apostasy and Hadiths here - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=83400098

Tom Dunne

Palmach wrote: »

So one has to visit a Muslims country to know Islam? Does one have to be female to talk about women's issues? Does one have to have lived in China to talk about Chinese issues. I haven't discussed with a scholar no but I have met converts from Islam who fled their countries Sudan and Pakistan because they faced death. One was imprisoned and beaten up by the police. The other suffered official harassment to the point where she dropped out of college and fled.

No, but one can speak with more authority on the subject having being both immersed in Islamic culture and having spoken to more than two Muslims.

And I am sure we can find many non-Muslim refugees who have fled their country due to persecution.

Palmach

confusedquark wrote: »

Indeed, not from the Koran, which leads on to my next point...And the converse is also true - if so-called Sharia is implemented incorrectly, then those actions cannot be taken as Islamic law. Yes, there may be a large support for the death penalty for apostasy in the Islamic world, but the majority of people will believe what's fed to them by those in charge (we're no different in the West).

I've already written a bit on the topic of apostasy and Hadiths here - http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=83400098

Yet according to the Pew research I posted it seems to be a generally held belief amongst practitioners of Islam that the death penalty for apostasy is correct and according to the Sharia. You may well disagree but majorities in some very large Muslim countries dont.

Tom Dunne wrote: »

No, but one can speak with more authority on the subject having being both immersed in Islamic culture and having spoken to more than two Muslims.
.

I wouldn't be so sure. Try talking to someone from the Shankill and someone from the Falls about the last 30 years of NI and see how much authority they have. Also care to comment on the Pew research. I don't need to live in an Islamic culture to read research.

Tom Dunne

Palmach wrote: »

I wouldn't be so sure. Try talking to someone from the Shankill and someone from the Falls about the last 30 years of NI and see how much authority they have.

So somebody experiencing something first hand is less able to speak about a situation than a journalist who drops in for a story? Or a researcher who observes as an outsider?

Palmach wrote: »

Also care to comment on the Pew research. I don't need to live in an Islamic culture to read research.

All that research shows is the majorities who would like to see these things enacted, not where they are enacted. Significant difference.

List off a few more countries other than Saudi that behead people for certain crimes or do not allow women to drive and I will accept that Saudi is not unique.

confusedquark

Palmach wrote: »

You may well disagree but majorities in some very large Muslim countries dont.

Your original statement was that the Sharia is clear about capital punishment for apostasy. If 100+ notable Islamic figures/scholars affirm that people are free to choose their faith, without having to face capital punishment (from the thread link above, http://apostasyandislam.blogspot.ie/), then you surely can't say that the Sharia is clear about it. If it was a verse from the Koran, then it undoubtedly would be clear, but the practice is based on a weak Hadith, and is therefore anything but clear - no matter what the majorities think.

Palmach

Tom Dunne wrote: »

All that research shows is the majorities who would like to see these things enacted, not where they are enacted. Significant difference.

They desire such laws to be enacted. Why so? What is guiding them? Sharia? You would disingenuous to say otherwise.

List off a few more countries other than Saudi that behead people for certain crimes or do not allow women to drive and I will accept that Saudi is not unique.

On women drivers you'd be right but this thread is about capital punishment. Afghanistan has it as Abdul Rahman can testify. Also on the books in Iran.

confusedquark wrote: »

Your original statement was that the Sharia is clear about capital punishment for apostasy. If 100+ notable Islamic figures/scholars affirm that people are free to choose their faith, without having to face capital punishment (from the thread link above, http://apostasyandislam.blogspot.ie/), then you surely can't say that the Sharia is clear about it. If it was a verse from the Koran, then it undoubtedly would be clear, but the practice is based on a weak Hadith, and is therefore anything but clear - no matter what the majorities think.

Koran 4:89 is used in Sharia courts as giving weight to the death penalty. There is dispute but it is cited. Bukhari is not a weak Hadith and either you are obfuscating or don't know what you are on about. His Hadith is probably the most authoritative.Your link unfortunately undermines your argument. From the link......

Undeniably, the traditional position of Muslim scholars and jurists has been that apostasy [riddah] is punishable by death.

and...................

Sayyid Abul A'la Maududi (commonly known as Maulana Maududi), the late founder and leader of Jamaat-e-Islami and a leading independent, revivalist Islamic personality of 20th century, is frequently referred to for his ardent argument for capital punishment for apostasy. He argued that there is a broad agreement of the leading jurists on this issue. He claims:

"To copy the consecutive writings of all the lawyers from the first to the fourteenth century A.H. would make our discussion very long. Yet we cannot avoid mentioning that however much the four Schools of Law may differ among themselves regarding the various aspects of this problem, in any case all four Schools without doubt agree on the point that the punishment of the apostate is execution."

Now there may well be many Muslims who disagree and many scholars who want to revisit this but the fact is in Sharia the punishment for apostasy is death. The Saudis are only carrying out what they see as Islamic Law. Kudos to those scholars for arguing against the death penalty and I hope they succeed.

Tom Dunne

Palmach wrote: »

They desire such laws to be enacted. Why so? What is guiding them? Sharia? You would disingenuous to say otherwise.

But desire is very different from action. I desire free beer and a 3 day working week, neither of which I am ever likely to encounter.

Being disingenuous is resorting to stereotypes and misinformation on Muslims and Islamic society, without being aware of the real truth.

Palmach wrote: »

On women drivers you'd be right but this thread is about capital punishment. Afghanistan has it as Abdul Rahman can testify. Also on the books in Iran.

That is a number of very vague statements. So, I again ask you to prove that Saudi is not unique in its interpretation of Islam by giving me examples of other countries who have beheaded people for crimes.

I take by your inability to demonstrate that there are no other countries who carry out such acts, that my assertion that Saudi is unique and not representative of Islam carries some weight.

Palmach

Tom Dunne wrote: »

But desire is very different from action. I desire free beer and a 3 day working week, neither of which I am ever likely to encounter.

Wanting something for yourself is different from forcing every to do what you want. You are being disingeuous in not wanting to see that the large numbers of Muslims who want the death penalty for apostasy are doing so because they believe it is part of the Sharia for it to be so.

That is a number of very vague statements. So, I again ask you to prove that Saudi is not unique in its interpretation of Islam by giving me examples of other countries who have beheaded people for crimes.

The Taliban chopped heads.Iran hangs them instead but death is the end result.

Tom Dunne

Palmach wrote: »

Wanting something for yourself is different from forcing every to do what you want. You are being disingeuous in not wanting to see that the large numbers of Muslims who want the death penalty for apostasy are doing so because they believe it is part of the Sharia for it to be so.

But that's the whole point, isn't it? Nobody is forcing anyone to impose these laws, that survey provides evidence of people's preferences, not the fact that Sharia law is enacted.

Palmach wrote: »

The Taliban chopped heads.

Are you seriously asking me to accept that a bunch of medieval thugs who imposed their will on a broken nation are representative of Islam?

Palmach wrote: »

Iran hangs them instead but death is the end result.

From what I gather, China, the US and other countries also impose similar penalties, with similar end results. No other country, that I am aware of, beheads people.

Your inability to give examples that prove that Saudi Arabia is not an anomaly only further confirms that my assertion is correct.

leyton

what do u mean by witchcraft? haha! witchcraft doesnt exist. and NO nobody should be killed. nobody has the right to kill another person on any grounds. god created us all. if we do wrong, leave it in the hands of god not anyone else. people can live their lives how they wish.

Palmach

Tom Dunne wrote: »

From what I gather, China, the US and other countries also impose similar penalties, with similar end results.
.

For apostasy? For homosexuality? Sorry mate you are in whataboutery territory here big time.

Tom Dunne

Palmach wrote: »

For apostasy? For homosexuality? Sorry mate you are in whataboutery territory here big time.

No, I never said that. What I did ask was for you to provide me with evidence of other countries that behead peoples as Saudi does. You went off on a tangent about the death penalty and I attempted to reign you back in by pointing out that other countries also impose the death penalty.

Nowhere did I mention apostasy or homosexuality.

We get it- you have issues with Islam, nothing new there. However, I cant help but feel your issues are borne out of ignorance, misinformation and what you see on the likes of Sky news. Classifying 1 billion+ people in the same category just because you spoke to two people who fled persecution and because of your views on that anomaly that is Saudi Arabia, demonstrates a spectacular inability to understand the context in which the issues you raise sit.

Palmach

Tom Dunne wrote: »

No, I never said that. What I did ask was for you to provide me with evidence of other countries that behead peoples as Saudi does. You went off on a tangent about the death penalty and I attempted to reign you back in by pointing out that other countries also impose the death penalty.

I don't know whether this is deliberate or an error but I wasn't suggesting the method of killing was unique I was suggesting that the Sauids are not unique in the reasons why they execute people and I merely pinted out many Muslims in many other countries are in agreement with Saudis on the matter of why they execute people.

We get it- you have issues with Islam, nothing new there.Classifying 1 billion+ people in the same category just because you spoke to two people who fled persecution and because of your views on that anomaly that is Saudi Arabia, demonstrates a spectacular inability to understand the context in which the issues you raise sit.

Seriously for a mod that is poor stuff. I never ever said all Muslims were the same and I think I pointed that out. I find it fascinating though that whenever Saudi is mentioned there is a rush to suggest that the Saudis, the keepers of the two holy places and the epicenter of Islam, have somehow misinterpreted Islam despite reams of evidence of many of Islamic religious figures and groups the world over being in agreement with them.

Have I issues with Islam. Yep as I do with Judaism, certain Christian groups, Mormons, Scientology and other religions. As an atheist I do try and learn what it is that makes people take positions and hold beliefs I regard as extreme which is what attracted me to this thread.

booom

I was enjoying the thread till I got to post #39. Tom, you put great weight to your argument that Saudi Arabia is an anomaly when it comes to Islam (despite it pouring literally billions into exporting its version of Islam throughout the Globe; so that you can call it an anomaly and expect all this money to have zero influence is a bit naive). When you repeatedly asked who else beheads people and were told the Taliban did, your response was to brand them as medieval. Believe me, there are a lot of people on the board who think beheading people, stoning people, amputating limbs etc to be medieval. The Taliban do not have a monopoly on medieval (you can argue hanging, death by lethal injection, electrocution and all that are no less so, and you would be correct). Like it or not, Saudi Arabia is the center of the Muslim world, no matter how it (Islam) appears in different guises. To say it is not (i forget the exact terminology here), representative and an anomaly is similar to saying the Vatican is the anomaly in roman Catholicism. I know we could split hairs over that one, but I think good arguments have been made and an acknowledgement of such is appropriate. I don't have to agree with everyone on the board to recognize they are making some valid points and deserve credit where it is due.

confusedquark

Firstly, apologies about the late response - have had a hectic few days.

Palmach wrote: »

Koran 4:89 is used in Sharia courts as giving weight to the death penalty. There is dispute but it is cited.

But surely if the Sharia is clear (as per your original statement), there wouldn't be any room for disputes... Koran 4:89 is a verse from a passage referring to traitors during times of war, something which is more evident by reading the verses before and after it, and understanding the context behind the verses being revealed. I've never been at a Sharia court hearing, but if that's being applied to cases of apostasy, then I'd have to question the authenticity of these courts (which has been my point all along).

Palmach wrote: »

Bukhari is not a weak Hadith and either you are obfuscating or don't know what you are on about. His Hadith is probably the most authoritative.

Either I'm obfuscating, or I don't know what I'm on about, OR maybe you don't quite understand the full story with Hadiths.

Bukhari is considered to be the MOST authentic hadith collection but not the ENTIRELY authentic hadith collection. Bukhari analysed the chain of narration of each hadith he came across, and then made a decision as to whether HE thought it sounded genuine or not, and he discarded many along the way. Sure he might have been good at what he did, but he was human, and fallible, and despite his best efforts, there are bound to be many many mistakes in his work. Even Bukhari's hadiths can be sub-divided into strong and weak, depending on the chain of narration and how well they fit with all else that's known. The particular hadith you cited earlier is consider a weak one (despite it being Bukhari), because it was only (allegedly) relayed from The Prophet (peace be upon him) to just one individual, and wasn't confirmed by a second person. These were stories passed down from generation to generation for 200 YEARS - one has to take them with a pinch of salt (nevermind using them solely as a basis for capital punishment).

Palmach wrote: »

Your link unfortunately undermines your argument.

Not in the slightest. I haven't denied what the majority opinion is on the matter. The link strengthens my argument that the punishment for apostasy in Islam in not clear, if so many scholars are vocal against it.

Palmach wrote: »

Now there may well be many Muslims who disagree and many scholars who want to revisit this but the fact is in Sharia the punishment for apostasy is death. The Saudis are only carrying out what they see as Islamic Law. Kudos to those scholars for arguing against the death penalty and I hope they succeed.

We'll probably continue to go around in circles with this, but my bottom line is - whilst I agree that the current majority opinion is capital punishment for apostasy, I'll maintain that there's a sufficient vocal minority out there to say that the punishment isn't a clear straight-forward affair. Sharia is based on interpretation of texts - interpretations can be wrong and change over time, but the texts won't change, so I'd encourage people to examine the texts with an open mind, read the arguments for and against, and make up their own minds on the issue.

old_aussie

Tom Dunne wrote: »

I really don't think wikipedia is a reliable source for any kind of debate.
.

I say it was just as reliable, maybe even more so, than the opinions of people in this thread.

The wiki muslim entries would be kept accurate by a large muslim community that want the truth to be expressed.

Palmach

confusedquark wrote: »

We'll probably continue to go around in circles with this, but my bottom line is - whilst I agree that the current majority opinion is capital punishment for apostasy, .

Thank you that is my point.

confusedquark

No, that actually wasn't your point.

Palmach wrote: »

For example if you are Muslim and want to change you are religion the Koran is clear you must die.

was your original point,

Palmach wrote: »

From the Hadith not the Koran sorry. "Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him"

was your next point, and

Palmach wrote: »

Bukhari is not a weak Hadith and either you are obfuscating or don't know what you are on about.

was your point after that.

"Current majority opinion" is very different to something being "clear" in Islamic texts. Drinking alcohol, eating pork, etc are things which are clearly written in the Koran and there's no need for interpretations. Things which aren't explicitly written in the Koran, and things which only have weak Hadiths in their support, and things which many different scholars have differing opinions on, are things which invariably are not clear.

Palmach

confusedquark wrote: »

"Current majority opinion" is very different to something being "clear" in Islamic texts. .

*sound of shifting goalposts*

Mark Hamill

confusedquark wrote: »

"Current majority opinion" is very different to something being "clear" in Islamic texts. Drinking alcohol, eating pork, etc are things which are clearly written in the Koran and there's no need for interpretations. Things which aren't explicitly written in the Koran, and things which only have weak Hadiths in their support, and things which many different scholars have differing opinions on, are things which invariably are not clear.

But if the majority opinion agrees with one interpretation, doesn't that make that interpretation the default (for lack of a better word)?

The majority agrees with that opinion presumably because the majority of religious teachers teach that opinion, so while you are right that that opinion is not supported by the main document in Islam, it is supported by the majority of the teaching in Islam. Why do you think this is? And given that the majority opinion is clearly wrong (and quite damaging, not just to the image of Islam but also to people at the receiving end of that opinion), why is more not done to combat it?

confusedquark

Palmach wrote: »

*sound of shifting goalposts*

Lol, you serious? I've done nothing but stick to my main point throughout, and have explained it thoroughly. I thought I made it obvious in my last post, but let me show you what shifting goalposts actually looks like:

Palmach wrote: »

For example if you are Muslim and want to change you are religion the Koran is clear you must die.

Palmach wrote: »

From the Hadith not the Koran sorry. "Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him"

Palmach wrote: »

Bukhari is not a weak Hadith and either you are obfuscating or don't know what you are on about.

Palmach wrote: »

Thank you that is my point. ("the current majority opinion is capital punishment")