Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - How adultery is punished in Islamic nations

- Tilted Politics (https://thetfp.com/tfp/tilted-politics/)

- - How adultery is punished in Islamic nations (https://thetfp.com/tfp/tilted-politics/82535-how-adultery-punished-islamic-nations.html)

How adultery is punished in Islamic nations

WARNING!!! THIS IS VERY GRAPHIC AND NOT FOR THE FAINT OF HEART

http://www.apostatesofislam.com/medi...eo_100kbps.wmv

This is another example of the type of behaviour that makes it very difficult to take Isalm seriously as a religion.

Kinda makes the Scarlett Letter seem positively kind in comparison.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackthorn

This is another example of the type of behaviour that makes it very difficult to take Isalm seriously as a religion.

Yes, because nobody has ever been brutally slain in the name of Christianity! The Crusades were a hoax, as was the Spanish Inquisition, and the Salem Witch Trials!

Sarcasm aside, any religion taken to extremes can be a terrible thing. At its core Islam is as respectable as Judaism and Christianity, it's all about how the followers decide to interpret it. If you truly believe all, or even most, followers of Islam do such things then you've probably heard a bit too much propaganda.

id have to agree with blasphme on this one...

same could be said about religions other than the monotheistics ones too...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blaspheme

Great point. The majority of Islamic people are good and honest people. It is just sad that some people take to heart literal parts of their religion, but that does not mean a whole religion should be ostrasized (no spell check). People need to be more tolerant of their prejudices and look at the whole picture.

What's this got to do with Sexuality? If you want to comment positively or negatively on another religion, it should be posted in Politics or Philosophy (if at all).

BTW, adultery is not punished like this in "Islamic countries", any more than homosexuality is punished by death in "Christian" countries.

I'm not defending anything (especially this kind of travesty), but keep the generalizations to a minimum if possible. And post in the relevant fora.

Mr Mephisto

Right, Blaspheme. I know quite a few Muslims, and none of them respect that kind of punishment. There are extremists, but they are in every religion. It's easy to point fingers when you're on the outside.

Yeah I agree with Blasphme on this one. I DO NOT agree with the name of this thread, it makes it seem like all muslim people are fanatics. Although terrible those actions do not represent all of Islam. Perhaps, Blackthorn you should join us in the 21st century and take the time to learn about other religions and have an open mind. I thank those of you who shed light on these neandrathal beliefs.

oh one other thing i might add.. christian beliefs have a 600 year head start on the birth of the islamic religion... im sure it was less than 600 years ago that the christians were doing the same thing for adultery and witchcraft.. im sure women were considered chattels, couldnt own property and had no souls either.... but things changed...

even 'islamic countries' bar one or two at most do this sort of thing.. lets not paint everyone with the same brush...

besides this is the 'SEXUALITY' thread.. i have no idea why its even in here...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto

What's this got to do with Sexuality? If you want to comment positively or negatively on another religion, it should be posted in Politics or Philosophy (if at all).

BTW, adultery is not punished like this in "Islamic countries", any more than homosexuality is punished by death in "Christian" countries.

I'm not defending anything (especially this kind of travesty), but keep the generalizations to a minimum if possible. And post in the relevant fora.

Mr Mephisto

Ok, but this is the second story this week about the brutality of Islamic customs, the first being the 14yo girl who's throat was slit by her father for allegdellly having sex. Just saying that certain countries do not practice these customs doesn't make it so.

i'll add to blasphme...any human enterprise, secular or religious...can have tendancies towards violence or peace. Religion and secularity have an unfortunate equality in the amount of damage done to humankind.

ACtually this is practiced actively in two muslim sharian countries Nigeria and Sudan. Iran just literally abolished it last year (december 28th), then you have countries like Pakistan and Afghanistan where although not on the law books it is still praticed.

I don't like the incorparation of culpability in this thread, Pope John Paul has gone on record of having condemned the actions of the past and gone so far as to ask forgiveness. On top of that Catholicism hasn't actively done it in centuries.

I would hope Islam would stop so actively rejecting reform. The religion has a great many problems, blaming christianitys actions from half a milenia won't change that. There are many good honest people in the Islamic world, it's just tough for me and I suppose people like me to respect the religion when there are so many hardline Sharian regimes across the world still perpetuating evil actions like this in the name of Islam (on top of things like Terrorism). They really need to get with the program.

Also optimistically hoping you guys are right, that it is only the hardliners doing this, then we come to a new problem. Maybe the problem isn't the loud muslim minority, it is clearly the silent majority.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blaspheme

Ya know I wondered how out of context I'd get twisted by making that comment. It's funny that it took one post but strangely enough you left slavery out of your argument.

Okay I made a general and slightly sterotypically biased comment on the muslim religion. I'll give you that.

When I check the calendar I see the crusades ended several centuries ago. Fast forward to today (and this is an assumption that the clip was current but hey -- there was at least a digital clip) and by comparison there are more acts of extreme violence comitted every day in the name of Islam than damn near any other force.

I do believe followers of Islam hijacked and crashed four commercial airliners in 2001. I believe there are more followers of Islam out there who would like to do the same -- in the name of Islam of course.

Christians, Jews or any other religion aside some of the most barbaric people alive TODAY -- not centuries ago -- are Islamic fundamentalists or the so called extremists. The extremists who live to enforece the letter of the law as written in the Koran (by the way have you read any of it?) and believe that the infidels must be eliminated in order to serve Alah. The violent extremists that have given the millions of legitimate God fearing people who follow the teachings of the Islamic faith a bad image. The behvior demonstrated in that clip in the year 2005 further tarnishes a what is already a pretty bad, sure albeit sterotyipcally, but earned reputation.

At it's core Islam may be benign but what is being played out before our very eyes today is anything but propoganda. Even CNN, the Clinton News Network, couldn't cherry-gloss coat this mess.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blaspheme

Yes, because nobody has ever been brutally slain in the name of Christianity! The Crusades were a hoax, as was the Spanish Inquisition, and the Salem Witch Trials!

But nobody ever expects the Spanish Inquisition!

Here is some bedtime reading. I remembered tonight after seeing people trying to assert the inquisition as some great horror of the church, that awhile back I was watching a talkshow (can't remember which one), sadly the interview was just rapping up, but the guest had been talking about the realities of "The Inquistion". Historically it is a bunch of crap, or at best horribly overstated revisionist propaganda to try and discredit the church.

http://www.nationalreview.com/commen...0406181026.asp

Quote:

When the sins of the Catholic Church are recited (as they so often are) the Inquisition figures prominently. People with no interest in European history know full well that it was led by brutal and fanatical churchmen who tortured, maimed, and killed those who dared question the authority of the Church. The word "Inquisition" is part of our modern vocabulary, describing both an institution and a period of time. Having one of your hearings referred to as an "Inquisition" is not a compliment for most senators.

But in recent years the Inquisition has been subject to greater investigation. In preparation for the Jubilee in 2000, Pope John Paul II wanted to find out just what happened during the time of the Inquisition's (the institution's) existence. In 1998 the Vatican opened the archives of the Holy Office (the modern successor to the Inquisition) to a team of 30 scholars from around the world. Now at last the scholars have made their report, an 800-page tome that was unveiled at a press conference in Rome on Tuesday. Its most startling conclusion is that the Inquisition was not so bad after all. Torture was rare and only about 1 percent of those brought before the Spanish Inquisition were actually executed. As one headline read "Vatican Downsizes Inquisition."

The amazed gasps and cynical sneers that have greeted this report are just further evidence of the lamentable gulf that exists between professional historians and the general public. The truth is that, although this report makes use of previously unavailable material, it merely echoes what numerous scholars have previously learned from other European archives. Among the best recent books on the subject are Edward Peters's Inquisition (1988) and Henry Kamen's The Spanish Inquisition (1997), but there are others. Simply put, historians have long known that the popular view of the Inquisition is a myth. So what is the truth?

To understand the Inquisition we have to remember that the Middle Ages were, well, medieval. We should not expect people in the past to view the world and their place in it the way we do today. (You try living through the Black Death and see how it changes your attitude.) For people who lived during those times, religion was not something one did just at church. It was science, philosophy, politics, identity, and hope for salvation. It was not a personal preference but an abiding and universal truth. Heresy, then, struck at the heart of that truth. It doomed the heretic, endangered those near him, and tore apart the fabric of community.

The Inquisition was not born out of desire to crush diversity or oppress people; it was rather an attempt to stop unjust executions. Yes, you read that correctly. Heresy was a crime against the state. Roman law in the Code of Justinian made it a capital offense. Rulers, whose authority was believed to come from God, had no patience for heretics. Neither did common people, who saw them as dangerous outsiders who would bring down divine wrath. When someone was accused of heresy in the early Middle Ages, they were brought to the local lord for judgment, just as if they had stolen a pig or damaged shrubbery (really, it was a serious crime in England). Yet in contrast to those crimes, it was not so easy to discern whether the accused was really a heretic. For starters, one needed some basic theological training — something most medieval lords sorely lacked. The result is that uncounted thousands across Europe were executed by secular authorities without fair trials or a competent assessment of the validity of the charge.

The Catholic Church's response to this problem was the Inquisition, first instituted by Pope Lucius III in 1184. It was born out of a need to provide fair trials for accused heretics using laws of evidence and presided over by knowledgeable judges. From the perspective of secular authorities, heretics were traitors to God and the king and therefore deserved death. From the perspective of the Church, however, heretics were lost sheep who had strayed from the flock. As shepherds, the pope and bishops had a duty to bring them back into the fold, just as the Good Shepherd had commanded them. So, while medieval secular leaders were trying to safeguard their kingdoms, the Church was trying to save souls. The Inquisition provided a means for heretics to escape death and return to the community.

As this new report confirms, most people accused of heresy by the Inquisition were either acquitted or their sentences suspended. Those found guilty of grave error were allowed to confess their sin, do penance, and be restored to the Body of Christ. The underlying assumption of the Inquisition was that, like lost sheep, heretics had simply strayed. If, however, an inquisitor determined that a particular sheep had purposely left the flock, there was nothing more that could be done. Unrepentant or obstinate heretics were excommunicated and given over to secular authorities. Despite popular myth, the Inquisition did not burn heretics. It was the secular authorities that held heresy to be a capital offense, not the Church. The simple fact is that the medieval Inquisition saved uncounted thousands of innocent (and even not-so-innocent) people who would otherwise have been roasted by secular lords or mob rule.

During the 13th century the Inquisition became much more formalized in its methods and practices. Highly trained Dominicans answerable to the Pope took over the institution, creating courts that represented the best legal practices in Europe. As royal authority grew during the 14th century and beyond, control over the Inquisition slipped out of papal hands and into those of kings. Instead of one Inquisition there were now many. Despite the prospect of abuse, monarchs like those in Spain and France generally did their best to make certain that their inquisitions remained both efficient and merciful. During the 16th century, when the witch craze swept Europe, it was those areas with the best-developed inquisitions that stopped the hysteria in its tracks. In Spain and Italy, trained inquisitors investigated charges of witches' sabbaths and baby roasting and found them to be baseless. Elsewhere, particularly in Germany, secular or religious courts burned witches by the thousands.

Compared to other medieval secular courts, the Inquisition was positively enlightened. Why then are people in general and the press in particular so surprised to discover that the Inquisition did not barbecue people by the millions? First of all, when most people think of the Inquisition today what they are really thinking of is the Spanish Inquisition. No, not even that is correct. They are thinking of the myth of the Spanish Inquisition. Amazingly, before 1530 the Spanish Inquisition was widely hailed as the best run, most humane court in Europe. There are actually records of convicts in Spain purposely blaspheming so that they could be transferred to the prisons of the Spanish Inquisition. After 1530, however, the Spanish Inquisition began to turn its attention to the new heresy of Lutheranism. It was the Protestant Reformation and the rivalries it spawned that would give birth to the myth.

By the mid 16th century, Spain was the wealthiest and most powerful country in Europe. Europe's Protestant areas, including the Netherlands, northern Germany, and England, may not have been as militarily mighty, but they did have a potent new weapon: the printing press. Although the Spanish defeated Protestants on the battlefield, they would lose the propaganda war. These were the years when the famous "Black Legend" of Spain was forged. Innumerable books and pamphlets poured from northern presses accusing the Spanish Empire of inhuman depravity and horrible atrocities in the New World. Opulent Spain was cast as a place of darkness, ignorance, and evil.

Protestant propaganda that took aim at the Spanish Inquisition drew liberally from the Black Legend. But it had other sources as well. From the beginning of the Reformation, Protestants had difficulty explaining the 15-century gap between Christ's institution of His Church and the founding of the Protestant churches. Catholics naturally pointed out this problem, accusing Protestants of having created a new church separate from that of Christ. Protestants countered that their church was the one created by Christ, but that it had been forced underground by the Catholic Church. Thus, just as the Roman Empire had persecuted Christians, so its successor, the Roman Catholic Church, continued to persecute them throughout the Middle Ages. Inconveniently, there were no Protestants in the Middle Ages, yet Protestant authors found them there anyway in the guise of various medieval heretics. In this light, the medieval Inquisition was nothing more than an attempt to crush the hidden, true church. The Spanish Inquisition, still active and extremely efficient at keeping Protestants out of Spain, was for Protestant writers merely the latest version of this persecution. Mix liberally with the Black Legend and you have everything you need to produce tract after tract about the hideous and cruel Spanish Inquisition. And so they did.

In time, Spain's empire would fade away. Wealth and power shifted to the north, in particular to France and England. By the late 17th century new ideas of religious tolerance were bubbling across the coffeehouses and salons of Europe. Inquisitions, both Catholic and Protestant, withered. The Spanish stubbornly held on to theirs, and for that they were ridiculed. French philosophes like Voltaire saw in Spain a model of the Middle Ages: weak, barbaric, superstitious. The Spanish Inquisition, already established as a bloodthirsty tool of religious persecution, was derided by Enlightenment thinkers as a brutal weapon of intolerance and ignorance. A new, fictional Spanish Inquisition had been constructed, designed by the enemies of Spain and the Catholic Church.

Now a bit more of the real Inquisition has come back into view. The question remains, will anyone take notice?

Quote:

The Myth of the Spanish Inquisition

by Ellen Rice

"The Myth of the Spanish Inquisition," a 1994 BBC/A&E production, will re-air on the History Channel this December 3 at 10 p.m. It is a definite must-see for anyone who wishes to know how historians now evaluate the Spanish Inquisition since the opening of an investigation into the Inquisition's archives. The special includes commentary from historians whose studies verify that the tale of the darkest hour of the Church was greatly fabricated.

In its brief sixty-minute presentation, "The Myth of the Spanish Inquisition" provides only an overview of the origins and debunking of the myths of torture and genocide. The documentary definitely succeeds in leaving the viewer hungry to know more. The long-held beliefs of the audience are sufficiently weakened by the testimony of experts and the expose of the making of the myth.

The Inquisition began in 1480. Spain was beginning a historic reunification of Aragon and Castile. The marriage of Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabella of Castile created a unified Hispania not seen since Roman times. Afraid that laws commanding the exile or conversion of Jews were thwarted by conversos, i.e. synagogue-going "Catholics," Ferdinand and Isabella commissioned an investigation or Inquisition. They began the Inquisition hoping that religious unity would foster political unity, and other heads of state heralded Spain's labors for the advent of a unified Christendom. The documentary clearly and boldly narrates the historical context, which intimates that the Spanish were not acting odd by their contemporary standards.

The Inquisition Myth, which Spaniards call "The Black Legend," did not arise in 1480. It began almost 100 years later, and exactly one year after the Protestant defeat at the Battle of Mühlberg at the hands of Ferdinand's grandson, the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V. In 1567 a fierce propaganda campaign began with the publication of a Protestant leaflet penned by a supposed Inquisition victim named Montanus. This character (Protestant of course) painted Spaniards as barbarians who ravished women and sodomized young boys. The propagandists soon created "hooded fiends" who tortured their victims in horrible devices like the knife-filled Iron Maiden (which never was used in Spain). The BBC/A&E special plainly states a reason for the war of words: the Protestants fought with words because they could not win on the battlefield.

The Inquisition had a secular character, although the crime was heresy. Inquisitors did not have to be clerics, but they did have to be lawyers. The investigation was rule-based and carefully kept in check. And most significantly, historians have declared fraudulent a supposed Inquisition document claiming the genocide of millions of heretics.

What is documented is that 3000 to 5000 people died during the Inquisition's 350 year history. Also documented are the "Acts of Faith," public sentencings of heretics in town squares. But the grand myth of thought control by sinister fiends has been debunked by the archival evidence. The inquisitors enjoyed a powerful position in the towns, but it was one constantly jostled by other power brokers. In the outlying areas, they were understaffed - in those days it was nearly impossible for 1 or 2 inquisitors to cover the thousand-mile territory allotted to each team. In the outlying areas no one cared and no one spoke to them. As the program documents, the 3,000 to 5,000 documented executions of the Inquisition pale in comparison to the 150,000 documented witch burnings elsewhere in Europe over the same centuries.

The approach is purely historical, and therefore does not delve into ecclesial issues surrounding religious freedom. But perhaps this is proper. Because the crime was heresy, the Church is implicated, but the facts show it was a secular event.

One facet of the Black Legend that evaporates under scrutiny in this film is the rumor that Philip II, son of Charles V, killed his son Don Carlos on the advisement of the aging blind Grand Inquisitor. But without a shred of evidence, the legend of Don Carlos has been enshrined in a glorious opera by Verdi.

The special may be disturbing to young children. There are scenes of poor souls burning at the stake, and close-ups of the alleged torture devices. Scenes depicting witches consorting with pot-bellied devils are especially grotesque. For kids, this is the stuff of nightmares.

Discrediting the Black Legend brings up the sticky subject of revisionism. Re-investigating history is only invalid if it puts an agenda ahead of reality. The experts - once true believers in the Inquisition myth - were not out to do a feminist canonization of Isabella or claim that Tomas de Torquemada was a Marxist. Henry Kamen of the Higher Council for Scientific Research in Barcelona said on camera that researching the Inquisition's archives "demolished the previous image all of us (historians) had."

And the future of the Black Legend? For many it may continue to hold more weight than reality. There is the emotional appeal against the Church. The dissenters of today may easily imagine Torquemada's beady eyes as a metaphor of the Church's "dictatorial, controlling, damning" pronouncements. The myth is also the easiest endorsement of the secular state: "de-faith" the state and de-criminalize heresy. Who will be the revisionists in this case? Will the many follow Montanas' lead in rewriting history?

Our 20th century crisis of man playing God - usurping power over conception, life, and death - leaves us with no alternative but to qualify our demythologization of the Inquisition with a reminder: 3,000 to 5,000 victims are 3,000 to 5,000 too many.

http://www.catholic.net/RCC/Periodic.../article4.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blaspheme

Yes, because nobody has ever been brutally slain in the name of Christianity! The Crusades were a hoax, as was the Spanish Inquisition, and the Salem Witch Trials!

Last time I checked, there wasn't a Crusade, or the Spanish Inquisition, or the Salem Witch Trials going on in the 21st Century.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto

BTW, adultery is not punished like this in "Islamic countries", any more than homosexuality is punished by death in "Christian" countries.

So you're saying that death is not the penalty for adultery under Islamic law? I suppose the Saudis don't behead certain kinds of criminals with swords either?

Please keep in mind, there's a big difference between a country that is secular and has a lot of muslims, and a country that operates under Islamic law.

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

Places like Pakistan in the tribal areas still operate under Sharian law, it's a authoritarian dictatorship.

Islam isn't the religion of peace, albeit most Muslims are peaceful, Islam is the religion of surrender and submission. Surrender to the will of Allah or face death.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei

ACtually this is practiced actively in two muslim sharian countries Nigeria and Sudan.

Then maybe the title of this thread should be, "How adultery is punished in Nigeria and Sudan."

No, no it isn't. Considering the religion tolerated the existence of others for its first 500 years without problem - do keep in mind that Muslism were the ruling MINORITY in the Arab lands until aftr the Mongol invasions when mass conversions began. They were considered the most tolerant of religions - the idea of Judaism and Christianity in there eyes were those who once followed the book but did not take the next step to believe Muhammad as the last prophet.

Allah is simply the same as us saying God - they are the one and the same. Do people of Christianity and Judaism not believe in the will of God? Same thing, different name, but same.

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

Death is also the penalty the Old Testament imposes for adultery (Leviticus 20:10-11 and also Deuteronomy 22:22), as well as things like blasphemy against the Lord (Leviticus 24:16), cursing your parents (Exodus 21:17), failing to keep the Sabbath holy (Exodus 31:14), practicing witchcraft (Leviticus 20:27 and also Exodus 22:18), and worshipping idols (Exodus 22:20).

Because Jesus commanded Christians to have mercy, these parts of scripture are now disregarded Christians. As others have already said here, that was not the case in Christianity for many centuries. Though Islam does not see Jesus as the Messiah they do see him as a great prophet whose moral commands carry the weight of God's word. The great majority of Islamic nations have, like Christians, also chosen to disregard these passages in their scripture. However these kinds of death penalties persisted long after they were renounced in scripture, just like in Chrisitianity. Unfortunately, some parts of the Islamic world are still behind the curve. It is disgusting and deplorable that such things are still practiced in the most backward of Islamic places but that doesn't mean these extremist freaks are the mainstream.

It is right to call for an end to that crap. It is wrong to assume that most Muslims support that kind of brutality.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CShine

Because Jesus commanded Christians to have mercy, these parts of scripture are now disregarded Christians.

The great majority of Islamic nations have, like Christians, also chosen to disregard these passages in their scripture. However these kinds of death penalties persisted long after they were renounced in scripture, just like in Chrisitianity. Unfortunately, some parts of the Islamic world are still behind the curve. It is disgusting and deplorable that such things are still practiced in the most backward of Islamic places but that doesn't mean these extremist freaks are the mainstream.

It is right to call for an end to that crap. It is wrong to assume that most Muslims support that kind of brutality.

There is a very active part of the Muslim world which is pushing for EXACTLY that....bringing Sharia law to the rest of the world. It's not just one or two countries.

I'll consider Islam a religion of peace as soon as it's "neutered" like Christianity and Judaism have been. Both Christianity and Judaism went through reformations, where the really bad stuff was taken out. Islam hasn't yet. Until it does, it's a threat to everybody who isn't a fundamentalist muslim.

BTW, several of the terrorist groups out there have stated that bringing Sharia to the world is their objective. IIRC, even Cat Stevens advocates this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

There is a very active part of the Muslim world which is pushing for EXACTLY that....bringing Sharia law to the rest of the world. It's not just one or two countries.

You're right - it's much less.

Quote:

Originally Posted by daswig

There is a very active part of the Muslim world which is pushing for EXACTLY that....bringing Sharia law to the rest of the world. It's not just one or two countries.

OK, name them. Name those countries.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CShine

OK, name them. Name those countries.

It's not individual countires, it's the radical movements within countries. See Algeria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Phillipines, ect...

Just take a look at all the conflicts in the world and tell me what the common denominator is.

Well let's see you have Saudi Arabia which is ran by the Wahabi's, a bunch of nut jobs if there ever were any. Wahabism is one of the fastest growing sects being taught in madarsa's around the world.

You have Iran which is actively involved in Iraq, trying to bring the shiite majority to theocracy like itself. Like I stated earlier, apparently they only stopped this practice (stoning) less then two months ago.

You have Sudan, which is sharian. They've been acting out genocide for the better half of 20 years now.

You have Nigeria which successfully pissed off human rights groups last years after sentencing a woman to death by stoning, after her baby was past the point of breast feeding. Catch was she was raped, but it didn't matter.

There are four Sharian countries right there that need to be put in check.

yet another thread in which we get to indulge the erasure of the line that seperates critique of particular practices in particular places with racist nonsense about islam---"they" are 600 years behind "us"---"their" history, like all others, recapitulates "our" history, which is the only history----"they" are an undifferentiated mass of folk caught in something like the childhood of a heroic american christianity, which is of course the Universal Ideal toward which all Rational Humantiy Aspires..

most productive.
yay.

Last I heard, they were executing people in Texas under secular law.

Killing someone who murdered somebody else is one thing, killing someone by one of the most brutal tactics employed for cheating on their spouse is another.

Did you watch the video Zen? I was hoping that the guys would get knocked out relatively quick, they were not that lucky. The guy on the right side of the screen was concious for the better part of 2-3 minutes. After being rapped fully in white sheets and buried up to his waste, the rocks managed to cut the sheets, it was pretty tough watching him trying to protect himself and dodge those rocks.

I see the same thought being repeated endlessly in this thread: "Some Muslims want to kill me, therefore all followers of Islam must want to kill me."

Do you really believe for one minute that all, or even a significant majority of Muslims think this way? Has it never occurred to you that if this were true, it would be impossible for a westerner to survive for 5 minutes on Arabian soil? Oddly enough there are tens of thousands of westerners living in the Middle East, working and raising families. How can this be? If Islam was this monolithic faith as so many of you suggest, surely any and all followers in the area would converge upon these infidels and kill them without delay.

A Jew eating pork rinds, a Catholic using birth control, a homosexual Baptist, none of these departures from religious doctrine would likely make any of you think twice. If someone suggests though, that there are non-violent Muslims out there, you're ready to argue all day that it can't be true.

Broad generalizations are so much fun, and so very much easier than taking the time to actually consider facts. Time for me to head off and use the search function, surely there's some good thread around here about all blacks eating watermelon or all Canadians saying "eh?" that I've missed.

Again, the problem isn't the loud minority, it's the silent majority.

People.. the Spanish Inquistion.. the Crusades.. were centuries ago.

You can't compare something that was VIDEOTAPED in present day to something that happened hundreds of years ago by people that aren't even anywhere close to being alive today...

Besides, this is for ADULTERY. Yeah, we execute people, but generally for serious crimes, not something as trivial as cheating on your spouse.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zeld2.0

Allah is simply the same as us saying God - they are the one and the same. Do people of Christianity and Judaism not believe in the will of God? Same thing, different name, but same.

I know, yet Islam is more strict.

Although Islam does indeed share positive messages such as love and peace, it is only meant towards fellow Muslims, otherwise it is that of death and hatred toward non-believers. Islam has never been the religion of peace, but the religion of submission and violence.

I don’t confess any religion, and I certainly find them all to be foolish and dangerous, and Islam is no worse than any other monotheistic religion, but the notion that Islam is peaceful is incorrect. The majority of Muslims are indeed very peaceful and good people, but this does not mean Islam itself was founded on peace.

"Fight and slay the pagans [Christians] wherever ye find them and seize them, confine them, and lie in wait for them in every place of ambush" (Surah 9:5)
"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the last day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and his apostle nor acknowledge the religion of truth of the people of the Book (the Jews and the Christians) until they pay the Jizya [tax on non-Muslims] with willing submission and feel themselves subdued." (Surah 9:29)
"Those who follow Muhammad are merciless for the unbelievers but kind to each other." (Qur'an 48:29)
"Enmity and hatred will reign between us until ye believe in Allah alone." (Qur'an 60:4)
Say to the Unbelievers, if (now) they desist (from Unbelief), their past would be forgiven them; but if they persist, the punishment of those before them is already (a matter of warning for them). And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God altogether and everywhere; but if they cease, verily God doth see all that they do. (Qur'an 8:37-39)
And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression. (Qur'an 2:193)
"Fight the unbelievers in your surroundings, and let them find harshness in you." (Qur'an 9:123)
"For he who believes in the Trinity, "the Fire will be his abode … a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemer." Qur'an (5:72-73)

I'm not sure you can entirely blame the "silent majority". One person can have an incredible amount of power and hold his people to his will. Just look at Saddam. I suppose we could have said: "Well, it's not our problem, why don't they just rise up against him?". Revolution is not an easy task.

Or did you mean us, the reest of the world as a "silent majority"? If that's the case, I thnk it is partially true.

Still, I think it's bad apples not bad bunch. Those fuckers corrupted their own religion and religious law for their own purposes.

Just for fun: DO you guys remember in "Bowling for Columbine when Moore follows the Taleban representative around? It's like they have all these "religious" rules imposed on the poeple but the leaders themselves don't abide by it. EX: Ban on music - but one of the Taleban leaders has a Britney Spears CD in his truck.

Or how about the hijackers who were at a strip club and were drinking before they crashed into the twin towers? Doesn't sound so "sharian" to me. Those guys are hypocrites. They want to impose their shit on others but don't follow it themselves. I don't think it's the religion, it's the twisted dudes who corrupt it.

Mojo, yes - I watched it - and found it repellant.

However, it's their culture - those are their laws, and who are we to judge them? Those laws are in place for a reason, and people choose to break them at their own peril. We execute people too, for different reasons, but again who are we to say what is significant or insignificant?

Plenty of blacks were killed in the South states for what reason? Being black. That's something that was going on a lot closer to home, and carried out by people (in positions of authority) who are still alive today.

There is state sanctioned incarceration and interrogation by UK and US governments - (I wouldn't be surprised if ugly things happen in some of those places too) they are just more (or less?) carefull about who gets to bring a video camera along.

My point is that people are and always have been capable of doing ugly, disgusting, vile and sickening things - it's nothing to do with someone's political, religious or national affilliation.

I just hope/pray that under stress, none of us would act in ways that we might find difficult to justify in the cold light of reason.

Anti-abortionists murdering doctors is certainly a recent phenomena.

Face it - people do some fucked up shit to each other. No one religion has moral high ground over another.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CShine

OK, name them. Name those countries.

It's not just countries. You've got places like Iran, Afghanistan under the Taliban, the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Queda, and in general the fundamentalist muslim movements. Their first goal is to bring the rest of the Muslim world under Sharia, and then bring it to the rest of us. Believe it or not, France is high on their list, which is why there was such a firestorm over their headscarf ban in schools.

daswig..

1) iran doesnt have this punishment anymore
2) taliban rule in afhanistan does not exist, and neither does the muslim brotherhood, as they brotherhood merged with al qaeda
3) al qaeda doesnt rule any country, not will it run any state in the fute, it was created and funded by the cia, and the CIA's brainchild got out of countrol.. and alqaeda stouch with the west is more to do with the US presense in Saudi and their meddling in arab politics than anything else.. so i dont see the relevance of it in this thread.

for those that think that muslims have a personal vendatta against non believers to kill every one, think again... i dunno whether its all bible school stuff or whatever, but half the things ppl have said here are plain ludicrous.

as for the cut and paste job of exerpts form the koran.. try and use them in context..plz..dont unsult our intelligence..and quote from any book can be made to look homicidal... maybe u should actually get to know, meet and talk with muslims and discuss these issues.. im sure it would go a long way to dispell your myths.