Rape victim, 13, stoned to death in Somalia

Originally posted by karl 12
She´s not the first and will not be the last.
Here is (yet) another account of a 23 year old Somalian girl being found guilty by a ´shariah´ court and being brutally stoned to death:

Ummm you DID notice that the victim's name of the 23 year old in your link is the same as the 13 year old in the OP?

Or did I miss something?

Originally posted by LoneWeasel
But isn't that the fundamental point? Because the implication of what you say is that it's Islam itself is the cause of these people living an existence that appears to be backward in time. That's not the cause and effect here. There was a time when Moorish, Islamic peoples were the most scientifically advanced in the world.

this is an oft quoted lie- Islam did not advance science any more than Christianity at the time, what it did, was be custodians for science and learning ALREADY there in areas where Islam invaded, subjugated etc (from the Greeks, Romans, Persians etc)

Islam was the religion not of the underdeveloped, but of the leading societies in the world.

AGain this not actually true but a modern myth perpetuated by Muslims and apologists

Christianity has its origins in exceptionally repressed, marginalised social groups. At a time the most developed society on the planet believed in Roman Gods.

Christianity has it's historical excesses, hence my reference to a time machine, however it went through a process of englightement, there is nothing to suggest that Islam will experience such a thing

The Bible hasn't changed. Society's interpretation of the Bible has changed. The Koran won't change either, but it's got to be our hope that Somalian interpretation of it does. But whether it does or not - Islam itself is not the cause of the problem. The society that interprets it is the cause of the problem. And the reason that society is underdeveloped is nothing to do with religion. It's to do with the history of the country in question.

LW

The problem is there is nothing to suggest that Islam will go through the same process which Christianity went through- what makes it worse, is that we in the west are being encouraged to timewarp several hundred years in the mean time in the hope that it can

Originally posted by Jazzyguy
Believe in the Almighty God who perceives all things, judgment shall come to the wicked and corrupt, none shall be spared.

Then let us sincerely hope your version of god (be it a He,a She,an It or a They) severely punishes these murdering,delusional,sexist,misogynistic,cowardly,insecure,religious bigots
for what they have done to this young girl.

[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]

Originally posted by LoneWeasel
As I said, using Islam to explain it is disingenuous. It may be the oft-repeated excuse, but that excuse holds no water because there is nothing more inherently violent about Islam than there is Christianity. Religion is used to excuse (inappropriately). It is not the cause.

Shariah law is not to blame-then what is?
In some countries,shariah court rulings advocate
medieval punishments such as beheadings and stoning to death (or having hands or legs cut and whippings)- these punishments (known as Hadd penalties) are drawn directly from the Koran the Muslim holy book as well as the Sunnah.
In shariah law,all human actions are put into one of five categories obligatory, recommended, permitted, disliked and forbidden.
If a person has been judged to commit an offence that is forbidden under shariah law then the death penalty usualy ensues.
´Religiously ordained homicide´ that is directly attributal to a specific non provable beleif system-simple as that.




[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]

reply to post by karl 12


I'm starting to wonder if this story is true. I mean the 23 year old woman from your story has exactly the same name and lived in the same place as the 13 year old. What are the chances, eh?

Originally posted by karl 12


Shariah law is not to blame-then what is?

I accept the points that both you and BlueOrder make about the fact that Shariah Law is being used as a justification for appalling perversions of justice. I accept that Islam is currently the dominant religion in the underdeveloped world. I accept that Islamic authorities misuse religion to manipulate their people.

I think both of you are missing my point - whether deliberately or not, I don't know. I'm suggesting that Islam is being used as an excuse by medieval regimes for the medieval justice they mete out to their citizens. If you took Islam away from despotic regimes, you would not lose the despots. They would find another excuse.

There are millions of people across the world who practice Islam accurately - which is to say it is a faith which guides them through life responsibly. There are others who are idiots who use it an excuse to oppress and murder.

There are millions of people across the world who practice Christianity accurately - which is to say it a faith which guides them through life responsibly. There are others who refuse to believe that the world was not created a few thousand years ago, and that dinosaurs are an elaborate hoax.

In both cases, I guarantee you, that if you took away the religion you would not have universally respopnsible citizens. You would still have idiots. Idiocy is humanity's problem - not religion's.

LW

Originally posted by LoneWeasel
I think both of you are missing my point - whether deliberately or not, I don't know. I'm suggesting that Islam is being used as an excuse by medieval regimes for the medieval justice they mete out to their citizens. If you took Islam away from despotic regimes, you would not lose the despots. They would find another excuse.

But I think you are missing the point, I still think there would be war and nasty acts if Islam did not exist, this is the land of man, fallen man, where violence, greed, lust, hatred etc will be with us until we all die.

However, we are discussing Islam, and the followers of Islam are especially fond of using their chosen belief system for reasons of oppression, murder, etc.

Now those individuals are still responsible for

a) their chosen faith
b) their chosen interpretation of that faith
c) the actions they take in the name of that faith.


There is individual accountability whilst recognising the effects a movement, religion, organisation etc can have- for example, Im sure there were good people who were Nazis, but the fact that the Nazi movement and ideology existed meant the deaths of many more people than if the Nazi movement had not existed

There are millions of people across the world who practice Islam accurately - which is to say it is a faith which guides them through life responsibly. There are others who are idiots who use it an excuse to oppress and murder.

but who are you or I to say what is accurate about Islam- unfortunately I daresay the people carrying out this act have read and studied Islam closer than you or I

In both cases, I guarantee you, that if you took away the religion you would not have universally respopnsible citizens. You would still have idiots. Idiocy is humanity's problem - not religion's.
LW

you cannot guarantee that, there may be some of the idiots who are doing this in the name of Islam, who continue to do idiotic things, but perhaps not so many, and not so many by a long shot.

Individual responsibility yes, but dont ignore the effects of the movement they follow

Originally posted by blueorder


but who are you or I to say what is accurate about Islam- unfortunately I daresay the people carrying out this act have read and studied Islam closer than you or I

That's a fair point.

Individual responsibility yes, but dont ignore the effects of the movement they follow

I'm not ignoring it - I'm just questioning its relative importance.

Generally speaking, I'm wary of any comparison between an essentially political movement (like Nazism) and a spiritual one (any given religion). The distinction is that very few religions have any strategic or political goals. Whereas Nazism sought a set of specific aims, religions (including Islam) ought to be intended to be spiritual guides, not strategic roadmaps...

So perhaps where we can agree is that where Islam has been taken as a means of government (as opposed to law making, as after all Christianity too has its laws) - the Caliphate principle, for example - it has been taken too far. The UK, where I am, has since Thomas Beckett's murder traditionally not had much time for relgious interference in matters of state. In the Western world, I guess that's true more widly, too. Religion supports society, not politics. I agree that isn't the case in places like Somalia. But I still think that's more to do with Islam being misrepresented than it is to do with Islam being a fundamentally (no pun intended) barbaric concept.

I would be genuinely interested to know if there are any Muslim posters out there, following this argument, or any students of Islam (as opposed to anti-Muslim would-be students) who can tell me if there is any scriptural basis for the punishment given to this girl? And by scriptural basis I mean specific instruction - not just the equivalent of reading about Sodom and Gomorrah in the Bible and deciding to replicate the story in a town in England...

LW

Originally posted by LoneWeasel

I'm not ignoring it - I'm just questioning its relative importance.

Generally speaking, I'm wary of any comparison between an essentially political movement (like Nazism) and a spiritual one (any given religion). The distinction is that very few religions have any strategic or political goals. Whereas Nazism sought a set of specific aims, religions (including Islam) ought to be intended to be spiritual guides, not strategic roadmaps...

That is obviously the ideal scenario, religion for the soul, man for governance, Christianity in the modern world (with some notable exceptions) does not tend to get involved in governance. I would caveat that by saying the legacy of CHristianity remains in governance in much of the world (it was as a Christian nation, and often with Christian guidance that democracy flourised and our systems of law, governance, education developed and spread via the world through the empire).

I would be genuinely interested to know if there are any Muslim posters out there, following this argument, or any students of Islam (as opposed to anti-Muslim would-be students) who can tell me if there is any scriptural basis for the punishment given to this girl? And by scriptural basis I mean specific instruction - not just the equivalent of reading about Sodom and Gomorrah in the Bible and deciding to replicate the story in a town in England...

to be honest, I never bother getting into it whether someone is a "true" Muslim or not, or whether one is more legitimate- like when Tony Blair used to suggest that Bin Laden was not a Muslim, again, who do we think knows more about Islam.

There is no definitive answer, would just be nice for Islam to get up to speed ASAP, however I have no belief that this will happen.

As an aside, I think the decline of western culture and civilisation (in terms of the "do what you want to make yourself happy" attitude that produces single parent familie, binge drinkers, druggies, gangs etc) means that muslims in the UK, for example are more likely to resort to a more "traditional" form of Islam when faced with the host culture

Originally posted by karl 12

Shariah law is not to blame-then what is?
In some countries,shariah court rulings advocate
medieval punishments such as beheadings and stoning to death (or having hands or legs cut and whippings)- these punishments (known as Hadd penalties) are drawn directly from the Koran the Muslim holy book as well as the Sunnah.
In shariah law,all human actions are put into one of five categories obligatory, recommended, permitted, disliked and forbidden.
If a person has been judged to commit an offence that is forbidden under shariah law then the death penalty usualy ensues.
´Religiously ordained homicide´ that is directly attributal to a specific non provable beleif system-simple as that.

[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]

Remember several years ago when the divoriced woman in Sudan was supposed to be stoned to death becouse she was pregnant? She had been divoriced for 3 years and was arrested becouse she was in her 9th month. It wasn't until a lawyer decided to speak out and ask the cop who arrested her if he SAW her have sex. The cop admitted that he did not. The lawyer asked him how he know she had sex and the cop said it was becouse she was pregnant. The lawyer then brought up a little item that is in the Quran, 'A woman may be pregnant up to 5 years after conception'.
Since the cop did not see the crime committed was cop was found guilty of the crime of accusing a honest woman of a crime. He got 200 lashes. The woman was set free.

reply to post by LoneWeasel


Lone Weasel. Thanks for the reply,I too see where you are coming from and appreciate some of your points but I think these incidents,particularly where it concerns the deaths of women,are a direct result of (and directly attributal to)
extremist wahhabi islam´s interpretation of abrahamic lore.
These are not just a few misguided people who are using their religion as a catalyst/excuse for murder,these are specific interpetations of abrahamic/shariah law within an accepted mindset of an organised religious institution.
Regards Karl

[edit on 02/10/08 by karl 12]

thats bullshdit man its so ridiculous that angers me and boils my blood.