Jealous lover who blinded woman with acid will be blinded with acid

An eye for an eye makes the world blind.

MOD Note: Please Read: The use of All Caps - ALL MEMBERS READ PLEASE

[edit on 11/29/2008 by semperfortis]

reply to post by UNIONWELDER05


how true...this guy should just be killed and thrown in a ditch. He serves NO purpose on this planet...NONE...he has proved that. Why take his eyes and make others care for his scum behind...or pay taxes for his medical care....we better start accepting the fact that this is not the good old days and that EVIL is real...and until we start trying to stop or atleast instill some fear in these idiots they will keep destroying society. The peace, love and harmony crap hasn't worked in the last 20 years...all its done was make the evil stronger.

[edit on 11/29/2008 by rcwj75]

reply to post by silo13


Huge STAR for you, silo13- way to be creative!

Give HIS eyes to HER. . .

(Applauding) (Whistling)!!

Personally, I think your suggestion should be rushed to the Iranian Au6th6or6ities right away!

I hope that surgical technology really exists; cause that's the best solution I've read for this punishment yet!

(Or do you think she would 'see' things the way HE did?)

reply to post by rcwj75


Hahaha
peace love and harmony. When did that ever exis?i never knew lowering yourself to scum makes you better. I always thought that made you equal. Fear? fear? people these days arent afraid of much i agree. I was afraid of my folks but still did what i damn well pleased. Most criminals have nothing to lose. So being afraid has no effect. What does a dog do when it is scared or backed into a corner?? it attacks.

MOD Note: Please Read: The use of All Caps - ALL MEMBERS READ PLEASE

[edit on 11/29/2008 by semperfortis]

Gives new meaning to the term "An eye for an eye"

Originally posted by CaptainCaveMan
Oh Iran that makes sense then they murder children hang them from cranes by there neck while everyone cheers on in evil glee.
Why is it when the Muslims get control of a place, they send it back 1000 years into caveman like days?
Why is it they cant move on and evolve?
If someone feels joy at another's death, I wouldn't want to be that person when my time comes.
How does having 2 blind people dependent on the state, help anything?
20 years in an Iranian jail as opposed to going blind?
I think many would rather go blind and live on welfare.

you have some sort of personal vendetta against cave-men??

-

reply to post by stumason


its in the NEWS dude..

Originally posted by CaptainCaveMan
Oh Iran that makes sense then they murder children hang them from cranes by there neck while everyone cheers on in evil glee.
Why is it when the Muslims get control of a place, they send it back 1000 years into caveman like days?
Why is it they cant move on and evolve?
If someone feels joy at another's death, I wouldn't want to be that person when my time comes.
How does having 2 blind people dependent on the state, help anything?
20 years in an Iranian jail as opposed to going blind?
I think many would rather go blind and live on welfare.

Yea, not like civilized America, where we trample people to death for a sale item, video tape the man on the ground having cpr performed and laugh all the while. They are SO backwards.

[edit on 29-11-2008 by shug7272]

Originally posted by GRANDWORLDDRAMA
those muslim folk are lunatics
backwards idiots and their backwards religion and backwards law
and UK saying that SHARIA LAW should be installed there....
hey UK, are you INSANE?!

Yes, lets make a bigoted blanket statement about an entire group of people. I'm sure there's not one sane, decent Muslim person anywhere in the world. Don't be a fool. Just as I would never call Americans "backwards idiots" because of our governments propensity to pillage and economically subjugate lesser countries, I won't call Muslims derogatory names simply because of the act's of a few irrational Muslims.

Ever heard of John Wayne Gacy? Ted Bundy? These men committed acts even more foul than this man, and guess what? They were both American, In fact, America has produced more contemporary serial killers than any other nation in the world. What does that say about us? I for one, think that the Muslim community is right on in many of their criticisms of Western society. We all have a long way to go, as a species, as a people, as brothers.

Yes, it is written to turn the other cheek, and that is a commandment to the individual. But Jesus also preached to abide by the laws of the land. Jesus, contrary to popular visualization, wore his hair short in the Roman tradition.

And the law of the land in the middle east is the oldest form of justice. Beats the rest of the Hammurabi Code. Read the entire code here.

Do I agree with this law? Nope. I agree with it about as much as I agree that someone should get 10 years for 2 joints in his possession. Blinding someone who blinded another is poetic justice at best however. I guess it boils down to the "do unto others.." that is one of the highest laws and traditions set forth. Can someone explain the difference between "Eye for an Eye" vs. "Do unto others?" Sounds like they are the same damned thing to me. And before anyone fires back that their homie Jesus changed all of that, please let it be reminded that Ezekiel teaches us that Jesus didn't come to change the Torah or the old testament, but rather to fufill it. He is the embodiment of an eye for an eye. And before you start drawing lines in the sand about the differences between Islam and Christianity, I will also remind you that Abraham,frustated because his wife Sarah couldn't concieve, took a mistress and impregnated her. Then by act of God Sarah concieves and the mistress is cast aside and told to flee. This is where the Islamic people come from. Its a stupid feud between cousins.

With all that said, forgivness is divine. Let the person who was blinded say whether or not this age-old Hammurabi Law should be enforced or not. Just like I feel that the family of the murder victims should decide whether or not that person should die. Kudos on the person who said let's transplant his eyes into her. That's some creativity, and if they are compatible then HELL yes. Why not. :S

reply to post by jcheney


Yes, but the rule is "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.", Just as you would never have someone throw acid your face, you should never throw acid into someone's face, regardless of whether they did it to you first. This also ties in with turn the other cheek.

I do understand your point, however, and as I said previously, I think the man should be executed.

I know Jesus is viewed as just an exceptional prophet in the Islamic faith, but he still said, "No" to "an eye for an eye." Yet here we are in the 21st century...

*sigh*

It's one thing to punish someone but I think this is foolish. To my chagrin, I know that "turning the left cheek" is just as revolutionary now as it was two millennia ago but there's no reason for this. And before anybody wants to know if a murderer should get the death penalty, I'm gonna say, "No" to that as well

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by GRANDWORLDDRAMA

 

Th "UK" has said nothing of the sort. What gives you that idea?

Also, just to clarify some misconceptions, Iran has a good record on womens rights, they don't stone people for being raped and they don't chop off you hand for thievery. You're all thinking of the US allies Pakistan and Saudi Arabia for those little gems.

There is different versions of Sharia in different countries. Some have a more modernized version of it, where some other countries strictly adhere to the Quran's Sharia law... Iran is not one of those countries that follows Sharia to the full extent, it has been in some ways "modified" over the years. Although eye for an eye does seem fair to many people, many muslim's are still against it...how do you know that if you asked that woman she would even do it? We know that not all humans are so cruel..

As one person put it, if they returned that deed, then somebody else should do the same thing to that person, and on and on it goes. Besides they are not going to force that woman to do the same thing, if she chooses not to they will accept it. But either way the man is going to be punished, even though its not really an eye for an eye.

Until we learn to forgive and to understand we will never achieve a level of enlightenment. Whilst the original crime was horrendous, replicating the same level violence achieves nothing other than to diminish mankind.


[edit on 30/11/2008 by Lady of the Lake]

"An eye for an eye, and soon the whole world is blind"

-Mahatma Gandhi (...a Strict Constitutionalist)

I am going to try to tread carefully here.... First off, what he did was NOT RIGHT. I want to make that clear.

HAVING SAID THAT....

I want to know what she did to HIM to send him up the wall like that. Amazing how just the crime the guy did was mentioned- and not what caused him to do what he did. "Jealous lover" doesn't cut it for me. I know jealousy- and I also know the kind of heartbreak that blows your life up and leaves a crater 3 miles in radius. Complete with radioactive fallout and need for a therapist nearly forever.
Instead of being a primate, he should have gone to the courts and demanded punishment for whatever she did to him.

So... the score as I see it is: A heart for an eye for an eye.

reply to post by wylekat


"he should have gone to the courts and demanded punishment for whatever she did to him. "

You kow what; you could be right.

In Iran they could probably come up with a reason to flog her to death or stone her as a form of punishment for breaking his heart/taking his honour/ending the relationship.

Oh wait - this is the same court that orders people blinded with acid...

Primitives.

I have to say wylekat has made my first point. You have only got a very narrow window of a series of events with none of the backstory to fill in and understand it in it's entirety. To make a judgement about it, we are all being swayed by the statement "Jealous lover who blinded women". But let's go along with popular sentiment for a moment...

I agree with Swatman that the five star prison treatment is hardly what I would call justice.

It has to be said that to not punish the man who committed this crime with an appropriate level, if any, type of punishment would be to diminish this woman and her suffering - in effect you are saying to the woman that the crime aganist her was not great enough to deserve a 'punishment'.

Is Justice called for this situation? I would say yes. A woman has lost her eyesight forever. She has been disfigured. These things deserve retribution of some kind.

When dealing with justice, one would want it to serve two purposes. The first as a consequence of taking an action that violates the safety and/or sanctity of a community. The second to show a deterrent to others who would take a similar action of their own.

What kind of punishment would serve?

Make him pay: I believe this should be his first punishment. I would hold him financially responsible for this woman's medical costs, and all extra costs now involved with the condition he has now left her in. Plus a lump sum payment to the woman based on her emotional suffering. I would ensure this man would be making payments to this woman for the rest of her natural life.

An apology: I would offer him the oppourtunity to show any true feelings of regret he may have towards his actions. If he did not feel he had done anything wrong, he would not be given such an oppourtunity.

Blind him: I would not consider this. Although theoretically the woman may feel justice had been done, I think with time she may regret that this action had been taken. It would also serve the man better to look upon the horror he had done to her, every time he saw her, rather than losing all ability to see himself.

Service: The truest form of punishment I could think up, would be in service to the community. Now don't look at me like that. Think about it for a second. I'm not advocating a daily walk in the park, to laze about picking up papers for half a day. Oooo no. I think if we were to utimately punish people for the wrongs they do, they would have to be put into service. There would be no time limit on this service, only a minimum time served before they could begin to be assessed.

For eg: A man has to serve a min of 6 months. He is assessed daily as to how many hours he has worked per day. So he has gone out with his 'work gang' of criminals, and they have made a half-hearted attempt all day long to complete a job. They would all be assessed as half a day's work. Therefore 6 months of work, might take them 12 months. I propose manual labour for every criminal - no tv time, no under-floor heated sauna's.

You want to "go to prison"?? sure, you might end up working for the rest of your life. I'm undecided if they should have a half-day on Sundays... mostly would say not.

For the ones who don't want to work: For those who don't want to work, who do not want to repay the community for the damage done to them? I say you give them a multiple choice question and ask them to pick one instead, or you'll pick for them:

1. Death
2. Castration with only mild anasethetic
3. The ol' eye for the eye policy - notice a choice
4. Labotomy

Hopefully he could work off his punishment in time to start working, and having most of his money paid out to the woman, after this.

Just a thought.

reply to post by azurecara


I take it you don't have any love for the US Constitution and Bill of Rights?

You are clearly a brutal Savage - the punishment you propose are inhuman.

"He who fights monsters might take care, lest he become one in the effort to defeat them"

Originally posted by MASH_DADDY
There is different versions of Sharia in different countries.

That is a popular misconception.

Shariah rulings and judgements are down to the
'specific interpretations of shariah by the individual iman ruling at the time'
-if the man is bigoted,sexist,unhinged or delusional then tough luck.

If this 'law based on abrahamic mythology' is legaly recognized and given legitimacy in the UK then it should be overseen and regulated by a member of the UK courts just as a safeguard to ensure no misogynistic or highly prejudiced rulings/punishments occur.

As for the O.P.,if the writings of this relgion are to be taken seriously and it literaly is 'an eye for an eye';then should all the writings be taken literaly?

Just of the top of my head ,what about these three?

Qur’an 9:5:
Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.

Qur'an 5:33:
The Punishment for those who oppose Allah and his messenger is : Execution or Crucifixion or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides or exile from the land

Qur'an 8:37:
In order that Allah may seperate the impure from the pure, Put All the impure ones (Non-Muslim), one on top of the another in a Heap and cast them into Hell. They will be the ones to have lost





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