[Curry Monster]

Originally Posted by axidy10

As for the cases where you hear of unjustified stoning’s to death, islam does not advocate these, firstly you must read up what is actually justified and why so many modern day politicians have said that sharia is by far the most just judiciary system (look up the german politicians) , in the cases of these stonings it is usually uneducated people living in stateless societies who decide they know best and carry out atrocities which have nothing to do with true sharia.
:

So this means nothing?

For example, the Islamic Penal Code of Iran details how stoning punishments are to be carried out for adultery, and even hints in some contexts that the punishment may allow for its victims to avoid death[1]:
Article 102 – An adulterous man shall be buried in a ditch up to near his waist and an adulterous woman up to near her chest and then stoned to death.
Article 103 – In case the person sentenced to stoning escapes the ditch in which they are buried, then if the adultery is proven by testimony then they will be returned for the punishment but if it is proven by their own confession then they will not be returned.
Article 104 – The size of the stone used in stoning shall not be too large to kill the convict by one or two throws and at the same time shall not be too small to be called a stone.
Depending upon the details of the case, the stoning may be initiated by the judge overseeing the matter or by one of the original witnesses to the adultery.[1] Certain religious procedures may also need to be followed both before and after the implementation of a stoning execution.[1]

[Curry Monster]

Maybe this stops women reporting rape in Saudi Arabia...

Saudi Arabia executes two policemen for rape: report - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Sharia Law - whatever you think or believe will never be accepted or used in the UK - If you want such a thing then your welcome to board a plane to Saudi Arabia where I am sure you will be happy living in fear or the religious police who beat people who are not in the mosques praying

[SimonH]

Originally Posted by axidy10

First things first, none of you guys have gone to a university or similar institute to study sharia, all of what you are saying is what you hear on the news.:

Yeah and every single news source report and all the videos available are all fictional and staged.



The worst case of denial I have ever encountered.

[vinny41]

Originally Posted by axidy10

First things first, none of you guys have gone to a university or similar institute to study sharia, all of what you are saying is what you hear on the news.

Incorrect some of us have lived a number of years in countries where the laws of that country are based on sharia law i thinks that counts more than studying sharia law imo

[liamt]

Originally Posted by Curry Monster

???? let me get this straight you are trying to justify your sharia law because rape is at such a low level in Saudi arabia? - Surely the people suffering the rape do not report it because THEY will be stoned!!!

Give it up - your not convincing anyone...

+1

it also seems to translate as its the muslims doing the harm, not the law. not really painting a great picture to be honest.

some of the bits seem pretty clever though but you get good bits with every system.

[DrPhil]

Does this mean I have to give back my "pottiest theist in AVF" trophy?

[SimonH]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Does this mean I have to give back my "pottiest theist in AVF" trophy?

Relatively speaking Phil you're entirely lacking in all pottyness compared to our stoning denier .

I think he's one step away from saying the news companies faked the stoning footage...

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by SimonH

Relatively speaking Phil you're entirely lacking in all pottyness compared to our stoning denier .

I think he's one step away from saying the news companies faked the stoning footage...

Relatively speaking?

I'll take that as a compliment!

[emporer]

Any normal person knows and understands that sharia law is just wrong, unfortunately some will just believe it all as its part of their 'religion' and if its written in some phoney holy book then they have to follow it, just like they have been brainwashed to do.

It will never be a part in this country thankfully, the non looney tunes of the population can actually see what is really is, and I believe in the next 100 years when Islam has destroyed itself then it will take this horrid sharia rubbish with it.

[SimonH]

Originally Posted by axidy10

First things first, none of you guys have gone to a university or similar institute to study sharia, all of what you are saying is what you hear on the news.

And that makes it bad because?

direct democracy and must conform to the broader framework of the Quran, these laws are subject to review by the Ummah (people) as opposed to closed review process controlled by religious cabals.

Yeah because relegious elements don't have the final word in Islamic states where Sharia is concerned..... It's all down to the people.

I'm pretty darn sure the women who get raped, then arrested then stoned didn't vote for that law..

Alongside this, I would argue that Sharia law has a judiciary system which accounts the people for there actions and also guarantees justice for all the people in society regardless colour, gender, or race.

Yep, real justice...being abused, imprisoned, buried up to their heads, then having rocks thrown at their heads for commiting no crime but being raped seems like justice for me as well.

Torture, imprisonment etc for homosexuals or atheists, all seems like quality justice. On the plus side you can be any colour or gender as an atheist and still get the same charming justice, so I guess that's a plus.

Now some of the statements you have made in you're thread is completely baseless and has been formulated by people who are feed up with the draconian system of capitalism.

Name one?

You're judiciary system is complete joke, made up of high profile judges who represent the rich class in society and make a mockery out of the poor and the helpless.

It sure as hell has it's faults but having seen Sharia "law" and "justice" in action I'm suddenly in love with UK law. I'm pretty sure the 13 year old child stoned to death was "helpless" while the men throw stones at her head laughing and jeering away.

Your religious law is an assault on humanity.

Take for instance, domestic and rape, which you have not been able to address.

LOL, and in at least a half dozen Islamic countries, they have less rape because it's not REPORTED , perhaps the thought of being called a whore, improsoned, then stoned to death puts some girls off? What ya reckon???

The uniqueness of sharia is that it deals with the causes of a particular crime rather than the symptoms/consequences. So for instance rather than tackling drink driving, the drinking is banned from the start so as to avoid the crime being committed in the first place,

Lets just ban everything, that's the advanced civilised way to deal with things. God forbid anybody should have a good time and a few drinks, talk about throw the baby out with the bath water. Just another backward law in action.

To contrast, the Legal code in Britain allows peadophiles to get away with molestering children and deals with them after the crime/damage has been committed!!!

How would you deal with molestation before the crime has been commited???

Britain does not allow molestation, there are some henious miscarriages of justice to my mind, but overall child rapists do not walk away if proven guilty.

The capital punishment is put in place so as to act as a deterrent, people do not commit the crime out of fear of the consequences, the success of such a system is only judged by the crime rates, and behold the stats show that the crime rates are much much lower.
It would be useless for me to give a statement without the facts so here are the facts regarding rape,
#1 South Africa: 1.19538 per 1,000 people
#2 Seychelles: 0.788294 per 1,000 people
#3 Australia: 0.777999 per 1,000 people
#4 Montserrat: 0.749384 per 1,000 people
#5 Canada: 0.733089 per 1,000 people
#63 Yemen: 0.0038597 per 1,000 people
#64 Azerbaijan: 0.00379171 per 1,000 people
#65 Saudi Arabia: 0.00329321 per 1,000 people

Seeing as women can be lashed to death or stoned for having sex out of marriage, I can imagine REPORTED cases of rape are significantly down in some Islamic countries yes.

Many women in Saudi, etc are not even allowed to drive or travel around of their own free will, they are terrified in many cases of their "husbands". Do you deny this? Many are not even allowed out alone without male family members with them. How much unreported rape do you think goes on ?

In many cases when a women has been brave enough to report being raped by her forced upon her "husband" she has been told it's not rape if it's your husband.

Women are given 10 lashes for having the gaul to drive a car!!

Islamic law Sharia promotes wholeheartedly a two tier system between men and women.

Stats are a joke , but no doubt you believe them entirely hook line and sinker.

Not to mention the fact that crime rates across the board are much lower simply due to the methodology of tackling the crime in that the cause is targeted and the consequences act as a deterrent

Possibly, I may agree with you on this one to some degree.

.

As for social cohesion, Sharia was the first law passed which did not discriminate against any ethnicity, or religion.

Get out of it, Iran executes atheists under Sharia Law, stoning is even in their legal documents.

It sure as hell does discriminate.

This combined with the fact that it is an obligation upon Muslims to give 2.5% of their surplus income to charity (in an Islamic state given to the bayt-al-maal ‘the state treasury’ (the worlds first benefits system)).

I have no issue with putting money aside, although of course it goes into Islamic coffers, which is really no different whatsoever to traditional NI /tax which goes to the government and pays for benefits etc. It's just better marketed.

This also means that hoarding is minimised as the hoarder is losing 2.5% annually and the wealth gap is reduced this increasing social cohesion.

How come you have multi billion dollar Saudis living like Kings and people who can't afford drinking water? There's just as much disparity in living standards in Islamic states between rich and poor.

If land remains uncultivated for 3 years it is seized by the state in order to utilise it for common interests. There is low taxation on new business’ to promote enterprise: all of these are economic benefits which the west could benefit from to break free from the shackles of debt to the bankers.

Lower taxation would be no bad thing, however much of Saudi etc ability to do things like this is down to resources revenue.

As for the cases where you hear of unjustified stoning’s to death, islam does not advocate these,

Here we go, despite even entire Islamic countries having verbiage in their legal system clearly laid out advocating stoning etc, this is nothing to do with Islam, yada yada.

firstly you must read up what is actually justified and why so many modern day politicians have said that sharia is by far the most just judiciary system (look up the german politicians) ,

Pretty sure that would be cherry picking. No logical developed politician would say stoning children is a good thing.

in the cases of these stonings it is usually uneducated people living in stateless societies who decide they know best and carry out atrocities which have nothing to do with true sharia.

So the lawmakers of Iran , Saudi etc are all uneducated and they are stateless societies?

Sorry, utter crap.

[SimonH]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Relatively speaking?

I'll take that as a compliment!

It was , but you're still potty mate, nothing is going to change that.

You're just not even on the potty scale compared to new guy.

[NorvernRob]

Originally Posted by SimonH

It was , but you're still potty mate, nothing is going to change that.

You're just not even on the potty scale compared to new guy.

I'm seeing Dr Phil in a new light, in fact i'm even beginning to think he's almost normal.

[Mr Incredible]

This link takes you to passage of Sam Harris' introduction when he talks about what reaction he got from a fellow female speaker after he had criticised the Taliban and their enforcement of the Burqa "laws". What is more surprising is the females response to a hypothetical case. And this lady apparently advises Obama.

The God Debate II: Harris vs. Craig - YouTube

Although the full vid is over two hours, you just need to watch a few minutes when Sam talks about this discussion he had had.

[liamt]

Originally Posted by SimonH

And that makes it bad because?

Yeah because no religions entities have the final word in Islamic states where Sharia is concerned..... It's all down to the people.

I'm pretty darn sure women who get raped, then arrested then stoned didn't vote for that law..

Yep, being abused, imprisoned, buried up to their heads, then having rocks thrown at the heads for commiting no crime but being rapied seems like justice for me.

Torture, imprisonment etc for homosexuals or atheists, all seems like quality justice. On the plus side you can be any colour or gender as an atheist and still get the same charming justice, so I guess that's a plus.

Name one?

It sure as hell as it's faults but having seen Sharia "law" and "justice" in action I'm suddenly in love with UK law. I'm pretty sure the 13 year old child stoned to death was helpless while the men throw stones at her head laughing and jeering away.

Your religious law is an assault on humanity.

LOL< and in at least a half dozen Islamic countries, they have less rape because it's not REPORTED , perhaps the thought of being called a whore, improsoned, then stoned to death puts some girls off? What ya reckon???

Lets just ban everything, that's the advanced civilised way to deal with things. God forbid anybody should have a good time and a few drinks, talk about throw the baby out with the bath water. Just another backward law in action.

How would you deal with molestation before the crime has been commited???

Britain does not allow molestation, there are some henious miscarriages of justice to my mind, but overall child rapists do not walk away if proven guilty.

Seeing as women can be lashed actually to death or stoned for having sex out of marriage, I can imagine REPORTED cases of rape are significantly down in some Islamic countries yes.

Many women in Saudi, etc are not even allowed to drive or travel around of their own free will, they are terrified in many cases of their "husbands". Do yo deny this? Many are not even allowed out alone without male family members with them. How much unreported rape do you think goes on ?

In many cases when a women has been brave enough to report being raped by her forced upon her "husband" she has been told it's not rape if it's your husband.

Women are given 10 lashes for having the gaul to drive a car!!

Islamic law Sharia promotes wholeheartedly a two tier system between men and women.

Stats are a joke , but no doubt you believe them entirely hook line and sinker.

Possibly, I may agree with you on this one to some degree.

.

Get out of it, Iran executes atheists under Sharia Law, stoning is even in their legal documents.

It sure as hell does discriminate.

I have no issue with putting money aside, although of course it goes into Islamic coffers, which is really no different whatsoever to traditional NI which goes to the government and pays for benefits etc. It's just better marketed.

How come you have multi billion dollar Saudis living like Kings and people who can't afford drinking water? There's just as much disparity in living standards in Islamic states between rich and poor.

Lower taxation would be no bad thing, however much of Saudi etc ability to do things like this is down to resources revenue.

Here we go, despite even entire Islamic countries having verbiage in their legal system clearly laid out advocating stoning etc, this is nothing to do with Islam, yada yada.

Pretty sure that would be cherry picking. No logical developed politician would say stoning children is a good thing.

So the lawmakers of Iran , Saudi etc are all uneducated and they are stateless societies?

Sorry, utter crap.

Boom.

[krish]

the rape stats for those Arab dictatorships are utter BS

[andyparksy]

Guess the same problem arises as ever with religion, even if the law is the word of whatever god, it is always going to come down to interpretation by people, and that's the problem right there.

You then get all manner of influences taking hold and potential to be twisted to suit whatever ends you are promoting. Take the Saudi situation.... Currently have pretty strict interpretation of the laws and you are right in that women not covering "properly" or being alone with men, but you go back just a few years into the 70s and 80s and it was really rare to see a woman with even her hair covered. They would have still considered themselves as Muslim as they ever had, but standards were different (and pretty sure there had been no clarification from the big man upstairs in the meantime).

My misses is Iranian, and they were an almost westernised country up until '79 (far to much so in fact but that's another story) but a revolution meant the power to interpret the same laws that were in force before and after changed and went into the hands of radicals and went completely the other way.

Also disagree that it is the "people's law". A visitor to a great number of Iranian homes would mean you would be offered "a proper drink" (Iranians are now well known as master home-brewers) and young people have to go to great lengths to do what everyone knows and accept they are doing. In Iran your can book taxis that are shared with other people and as such are cramped and have less strict rules about segregation. There was an article recently that young people have started, with friends, to book these and just drive around all night as it allows them to be close to each other!

Sharia mortgages are similar. The effect is the same but structured in a way to "pretend" they do not carry interest when obviously they do, just to be pragmatic. This may be for the good but still comes down to a human "twist" to interpret rules.

I hate the way that I cannot go to Iran with my misses (we are not married) and that my half Iranian children will miss out on what is an incredible country, even though 20 years ago it would not have been a problem even under the same laws.

[logiciel]

Originally Posted by liamt

why is gay marriage nonsense? or do you mean its stupid for gay people to want marriage in church because of the hypocrisy?
are plenty against it though? you mean 75%?

Simple - because marriage is about one man and one woman.
It's nonsense to try to change the meaning of a word.
And yes, it's stupid as well, and hypocritical, to try to bring churches into it.
When Labour introduced civil partnerships they made a real attempt to find out what gay people wanted.
That was security in their relationships, but a distinction from those of men with women.
Civil partnerships gave them just that - it gave the rights and it maintained "glad to be gay".
A few gay people, totally unrepresentative, decided that wasn't good enough for them - they wanted to do everything straight people do - and abandon their distinctiveness.
There's no way of knowing the figures - but this gay man can report that none of his gay friends or acquaintances want to take over the straight institution of marriage, and they don't want their excellent civil partnerships devalued by others being able to do that.

And this thread gives me the opportunity to go back on previous comments in others, and to say that I'd happily carry out the death penalty myself on the whole lot of the people who killed that girl so hideously.

[simon ess]

Crikey - that's a first logiciel.

I agree with you on the distinction between marriage and civil partnerships.

[lucasisking]

Originally Posted by Mr Incredible

This link takes you to passage of Sam Harris' introduction when he talks about what reaction he got from a fellow female speaker after he had criticised the Taliban and their enforcement of the Burqa "laws". What is more surprising is the females response to a hypothetical case. And this lady apparently advises Obama.

The God Debate II: Harris vs. Craig - YouTube

Although the full vid is over two hours, you just need to watch a few minutes when Sam talks about this discussion he had had.

Can't watch it now, but I've seen Sam make this argument a couple of times- and its a potent one. The reaction you mention (in my opinion) highlights the dangers of moral relativism.

Things that are wrong should be wrong for everybody. Human rights shouldn't begin and end at national boundaries.

Sharia Law is an anti-human system designed not to protect victims of crime, but to enforce a 7th Century Islamic code.

It is an abomination. End of story.

[Mr Incredible]

Originally Posted by lucasisking

Can't watch it now, but I've seen Sam make this argument a couple of times- and its a potent one. The reaction you mention (in my opinion) highlights the dangers of moral relativism.

Things that are wrong should be wrong for everybody. Human rights shouldn't begin and end at national boundaries.

Sharia Law is an anti-human system designed not to protect victims of crime, but to enforce a 7th Century Islamic code.

It is an abomination. End of story.

You've probably seen it, but to whet the appetite of those who haven't, basically the story is of how someone would be OK with the deliberate blinding of every third child if it was mandated in their religion.

That's the most dangerous aspect of (some) religious views where because it is mandated from on high, anything could be acceptable. And the theists say that without a guiding moral code for atheists "anything is permissible". I tell you what, I wouldn't allow the blinding of every third child no matter what. I think some religious peeps have a very skewed idea about morality with respect to the well being of humans.

[Toko Black]

Just a quick thought for those that think that since it is their country, it's not our problem.

Consider any system that justifies the killing of women by stoning to death for adultery. Consider any person who lives within that system and is led to beleive it is just because it is Gods will.

Exactly how much value to you think they would then attribute to the lives of someone in a secular western democracy where pornography, sex before marriage etc are legal.

Would you expect someone brought up under that sort of system to be more or less likely to turn a blind eye to insurgency or acts of terrorism against people in a secular western democracy ?

[liamt]

Originally Posted by Mr Incredible

You've probably seen it, but to whet the appetite of those who haven't, basically the story is of how someone would be OK with the deliberate blinding of every third child if it was mandated in their religion.

That's the most dangerous aspect of (some) religious views where because it is mandated from on high, anything could be acceptable. And the theists say that without a guiding moral code for atheists "anything is permissible". I tell you what, I wouldn't allow the blinding of every third child no matter what. I think some religious peeps have a very skewed idea about morality with respect to the well being of humans.

+1

i think many theists also look down on atheists as they dont seem to think we can live a moral life without following a religious code, which is BS. i dont think you should need religion to be a good person. its all pretty obvious stuff really.

[dan yeates]

Originally Posted by liamt

+1

i think many theists also look down on atheists as they dont seem to think we can live a moral life without following a religious code, which is BS. i dont think you should need religion to be a good person. its all pretty obvious stuff really.

I helped an elderly woman once remove the cover from her windscreen on her car when it was covered with snow. I also scraped snow away from her doors so she could get in easily (roads were gritted and clear so she was happy to drive!)

She asked if I was a Christian, she then said I must be as I helped her. I didn't want a confrontation, so just said yes, but I thought what an odd thing to say. Non Christians can do good as well!

[liamt]

Originally Posted by dan yeates

I helped an elderly woman once remove the cover from her windscreen on her car when it was covered with snow. I also scraped snow away from her doors so she could get in easily (roads were gritted and clear so she was happy to drive!)

She asked if I was a Christian, she then said I must be as I helped her. I didn't want a confrontation, so just said yes, but I thought what an odd thing to say. Non Christians can do good as well!

you should have said you were a devil worshipper and invited her to your house to sacrifice a chicken

[Mr Incredible]

Originally Posted by liamt

you should have said you were a devil worshipper and invited her to your house to sacrifice a chicken

Or choking one!

[liamt]

Originally Posted by Mr Incredible

Or choking one!

[Pecker]

One thing that needs to be said, because I think there's some confusion.

Sharia law is not just a list of laws, it's a system. Like any system it needs to be applied, and it's the application which will ultimately prove to be good or bad.

In some places - 'the sticks' in some poor Islamic countries, the application is barbaric. In others it's barely different to how law is applied here.

I'm against the death penalty, and in that sense I'm against Sharia law because it allows for it. But then again, that's a bit like saying I'm against democracy because the US is democratic and they have the death penalty.

There's good and bad in all systems. I'd probably rather live under fairly applied Sharia law than in Texas.

If I may give an example? In Islam the death penalty is stipulated. However, for obvious reasons, it's only stipulated if you're guilty. In the US there are Islamic groups campaigning against the death penalty because they don't feel it's possible to prove someone is guilty to the standard required.

Taking another example of religious law - in Judaism the death penalty is stipulated. However, the rules are extreme. There must be two completely independent witnesses, both must have warned the murderer in the seconds before the murder, the murderer must have agreed that they had been warned, and that they were going to ignore the warning, and (just as in UK law) you cannot be forced to testify against yourself.

Now because of this a Beth Din which executed one man in 70 years was called 'destructive'.

So, for me, it's not about Islam, or Judaism, or any other ideology. It's about how fairly any system of law is applied.

Steve W

[Curry Monster]

Religion has no place in deciding laws...

To the OP ...Again I notice your friend is very quiet on this thread now...

[lucasisking]

Originally Posted by dan yeates

I helped an elderly woman once remove the cover from her windscreen on her car when it was covered with snow. I also scraped snow away from her doors so she could get in easily (roads were gritted and clear so she was happy to drive!)

She asked if I was a Christian, she then said I must be as I helped her. I didn't want a confrontation, so just said yes, but I thought what an odd thing to say. Non Christians can do good as well!

It's a sad state of affairs if not declaring oneself a christian is thought to lead to confrontation.

In my opinion you should not have said you were Christian, as this only perpetuates the myth that Christianity is inextricably linked to morality. We need to all work to overturn this misconception if we want to see a social consciousness shift away from religion.

As a side note, you should have reminded her about the Good Samaritan. As this incident took place before Jesus' time, the Samaritan could not possibly have been a Christian!

[lucasisking]

Originally Posted by Pecker

One thing that needs to be said, because I think there's some confusion.

Sharia law is not just a list of laws, it's a system. Like any system it needs to be applied, and it's the application which will ultimately prove to be good or bad.

In some places - 'the sticks' in some poor Islamic countries, the application is barbaric. In others it's barely different to how law is applied here.

I'm against the death penalty, and in that sense I'm against Sharia law because it allows for it. But then again, that's a bit like saying I'm against democracy because the US is democratic and they have the death penalty.

There's good and bad in all systems. I'd probably rather live under fairly applied Sharia law than in Texas.

If I may give an example? In Islam the death penalty is stipulated. However, for obvious reasons, it's only stipulated if you're guilty. In the US there are Islamic groups campaigning against the death penalty because they don't feel it's possible to prove someone is guilty to the standard required.

Taking another example of religious law - in Judaism the death penalty is stipulated. However, the rules are extreme. There must be two completely independent witnesses, both must have warned the murderer in the seconds before the murder, the murderer must have agreed that they had been warned, and that they were going to ignore the warning, and (just as in UK law) you cannot be forced to testify against yourself.

Now because of this a Beth Din which executed one man in 70 years was called 'destructive'.

So, for me, it's not about Islam, or Judaism, or any other ideology. It's about how fairly any system of law is applied.

Steve W

No, Steve. Yet again you are arguing that all ideologies/ cultures/ religions are all equal- its just the 'application' thats different. This simply isn't true. It is ok for us to admit that some systems are better than others. Sharia is a system not based upon evidence, reason, morality or justice- things essential for any justice system. They are based upon a strict adherence to a holy book. As such the system is fossilised in the 7th century. It cannot update or self-correct as our legal system does, and fairness or justice to the victim are secondary to the fundamentals of Islam.

Regardless of it's various benign or moderate applications, the system is fundamentally flawed. As is any justice system based upon scripture or interpretations of divine will.

The 'application' argument doesn't work. You could say for example that there's nothing inherently wrong with Naziism. After all, its only its application (exterminating millions of Jews) that was at fault, right? No. Naziism is an ideology that should be filed in the dustbin of history, as is Islamism.