• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Saudi Arabia sentences woman convicted of adultery to death by stoning

Status
Not open for further replies.

Frog-fu

Banned
Yeah because this is totally on us, not the government or dictators. I understand the frustration and anger but comments like this are of no need man.

All three share the blame in this toxic, digusting perversion of Islamic faith. Saudia Arabia - like many other Islamic countries - must go through a reformation, and I don't see it happening any other way than an Arab Spring of its own.

The people need to take back control from their oppressors. They need to do away with the extremist idealogues on top, abolish the royal family and excise all traces of Whabbism and extreme variants of Sharia law from its constitution and laws.

You are right, I am angry and frustrated, but as one Muslim to another, this barbarism cannot be allowed to go on. It is sickening and evil.
 

Cormano

Member
HoEZ4ce.png

Disgusting.
 

ElTorro

I wanted to dominate the living room. Then I took an ESRAM in the knee.
All three share the blame in this toxic, digusting perversion of Islamic faith.

The lashing of adulterers is very clearly mandated in the Qur'an, and the punishment of stoning is very clearly mandated in countless Hadith—including those in collections of Hadith seen as most authentic by a majority of scholars, like Sahīh al-Buchārī—as a command of the Prophet.

How is that a perversion of the faith?
 
Fuck Saudi Arabia. That is pure evil. If you believe in a god that condones punishment like this, then fuck him too. Saudi Arabia is what ISIS aspires to become.
 

Xexros

Banned
All three share the blame in this toxic, digusting perversion of Islamic faith. Saudia Arabia - like many other Islamic countries - must go through a reformation, and I don't see it happening any other way than an Arab Spring of its own.

The people need to take back control from their oppressors. They need to do away with the extremist idealogues on top, abolish the royal family and excise all traces of Whabbism and extreme variants of Sharia law from its constitution and laws.

You are right, I am angry and frustrated, but as one Muslim to another, this barbarism cannot be allowed to go on. It is sickening and evil.



Perversion of faith? Are you serious? Hahahha

Millions of Muslims that aren't "radicals" or "extremists" support sharia law. Do people really not know this. Why don't you go look up their views on homosexuals. Lmao
 

G-Bus

Banned
Had no idea that's how they went about stoning people to death. Like.. rules and shit. That's so fucked up.

I really wish a country would say fuck it and put an end to this shit.
 

Mohonky

Member
Perversion of faith? Are you serious? Hahahha

Millions of Muslims that aren't "radicals" or "extremists" support sharia law. Do people really not know this. Why don't you go look up their views on homosexuals. Lmao

Sharia law actually makes a lot of sense in context of its implementation and execution in lands that are largely tribal And devoid of a central governing body.

The problem is the ridiculous laws and the brutal punishments for breaking them. If you take them out, Sharia is actually a good system for smaller communities and tribes to settle disputes among its citizens. Unfortunately removing this sort of shit from Sharia law probably will never happen.
 

ElTorro

I wanted to dominate the living room. Then I took an ESRAM in the knee.
Unfortunately removing this sort of shit from Sharia law probably will never happen.

That's the problem when you declare such texts "holy" and "infallible". You can't just get rid of the obvious barbarism. At best, you can hope for exegetic mental gymnastics and the laziness of most people to actually read what it's in their holy texts. Unfortunately, Islam's doctrinal sources are much more coherent and intelligible than the utter incomprehensible mess that is the Christian Bible. Which makes them easier to read and follow and harder to ignore.
 

Xexros

Banned
Sharia law actually makes a lot of sense in context of its implementation and execution in lands that are largely tribal And devoid of a central governing body.

The problem is the ridiculous laws and the brutal punishments for breaking them. If you take them out, Sharia is actually a good system for smaller communities and tribes to settle disputes among its citizens. Unfortunately removing this sort of shit from Sharia law probably will never happen.

160.gif
 

szaromir

Banned
I had to read up on this Sharia law thing and I found this on wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#Application_by_country
Sharia judicial proceedings have significant differences from other legal traditions, including those in both common law and civil law. Sharia courts traditionally do not rely on lawyers; plaintiffs and defendants represent themselves. Trials are conducted solely by the judge, and there is no jury system. There is no pre-trial discovery process, and no cross-examination of witnesses. Unlike common law, judges' verdicts do not set binding precedents[146][147] under the principle of stare decisis,[148] and unlike civil law, sharia is left to the interpretation in each case and has no formally codified universal statutes.[149]

The rules of evidence in sharia courts also maintain a distinctive custom of prioritizing oral testimony.[150] Witnesses, in a sharia court system, must be faithful, that is Muslim.[151] Male Muslim witnesses are deemed more reliable than female Muslim witnesses, and non-Muslim witnesses considered unreliable and receive no priority in a sharia court.[152][153] In civil cases, a Muslim woman witness is considered half the worth and reliability than a Muslim man witness.[154][155] In criminal cases, women witnesses are unacceptable in stricter, traditional interpretations of sharia, such as those found in Hanbali madhhab.[151]

Criminal cases

A confession, an oath, or the oral testimony of Muslim witnesses are the main evidence admissible, in sharia courts, for hudud crimes, that is the religious crimes of adultery, fornication, rape, accusing someone of illicit sex but failing to prove it, apostasy, drinking intoxicants and theft.[156][157][158] Testimony must be from at least two free Muslim male witnesses, or one Muslim male and two Muslim females, who are not related parties and who are of sound mind and reliable character. Testimony to establish the crime of adultery, fornication or rape must be from four Muslim male witnesses, with some fiqhs allowing substitution of up to three male with six female witnesses; however, at least one must be a Muslim male.[159] Forensic evidence (i.e., fingerprints, ballistics, blood samples, DNA etc.) and other circumstantial evidence is likewise rejected in hudud cases in favor of eyewitnesses, a practice which can cause severe difficulties for women plaintiffs in rape cases.[160][161]

Muslim jurists have debated whether and when coerced confession and coerced witnesses are acceptable. The majority opinion of jurists in the Hanafi madhhab, for example, ruled that torture to get evidence is acceptable and such evidence is valid, but a 17th-century text by Hanafi jurist Muhammad Shaykhzade argued that coerced confession should be invalid; Shaykhzade acknowledged that beating to get confession has been authorized in fatwas by many Islamic jurists.[162]

Civil cases

Quran recommends written contracts in the case of debt-related transactions, and oral contracts for commercial and other civil contracts.[155][163] Marriage is solemnized as a written financial contract, in the presence of two Muslim male witnesses, and it includes a brideprice (Mahr) payable from a Muslim man to a Muslim woman. The brideprice is considered by a sharia court as a form of debt. Written contracts are paramount, in sharia courts, in the matters of dispute that are debt-related, which includes marriage contracts.[164] Written contracts in debt-related cases, when notarized by a judge, is deemed more reliable.[165]

In commercial and civil contracts, such as those relating to exchange of merchandise, agreement to supply or purchase goods or property, and others, oral contracts and the testimony of Muslim witnesses triumph over written contracts. Sharia system has held that written commercial contracts may be forged.[165][166] Timur Kuran states that the treatment of written evidence in religious courts in Islamic regions created an incentive for opaque transactions, and the avoidance of written contracts in economic relations. This led to a continuation of a "largely oral contracting culture" in Muslim nations and communities.[166][167]

In lieu of written evidence, oaths are accorded much greater weight; rather than being used simply to guarantee the truth of ensuing testimony, they are themselves used as evidence. Plaintiffs lacking other evidence to support their claims may demand that defendants take an oath swearing their innocence, refusal thereof can result in a verdict for the plaintiff.[168] Taking an oath for Muslims can be a grave act; one study of courts in Morocco found that lying litigants would often "maintain their testimony 'right up to the moment of oath-taking and then to stop, refuse the oath, and surrender the case."[169] Accordingly, defendants are not routinely required to swear before testifying, which would risk casually profaning the Quran should the defendant commit perjury;[169] instead oaths are a solemn procedure performed as a final part of the evidence process.

Sentencing

Main article: Diyya

Sharia courts treat women and men as unequal, with Muslim woman's life and blood-money compensation sentence (Diyya) as half as that of a Muslim man's life.[170][171] Sharia also treats Muslims and non-Muslims as unequal in the sentencing process.[172] Human Rights Watch and United States' Religious Freedom Report note that in sharia courts of Saudi Arabia, "The calculation of accidental death or injury compensation is discriminatory. In the event a court renders a judgment in favor of a plaintiff who is a Jewish or Christian male, the plaintiff is only entitled to receive 50 percent of the compensation a Muslim male would receive; all other non-Muslims [Buddhists, Hindus, Jains, Atheists] are only entitled to receive one-sixteenth of the amount a male Muslim would receive".[173][174][175]

Saudi Arabia follows Hanbali sharia, whose historic jurisprudence texts considered a Christian or Jew life as half the worth of a Muslim. Jurists of other schools of law in Islam have ruled differently. For example, Shafi'i sharia considers a Christian or Jew life as a third the worth of a Muslim, and Maliki's sharia considers it worth half.[172] The legal schools of Hanafi, Maliki and Shafi'i Sunni Islam as well as those of twelver Shia Islam have considered the life of polytheists and atheists as one-fifteenth the value of a Muslim during sentencing.[172]
Is it how court proceeding look like in many Muslim countries? That's so fucked up and repugnant on so many levels.
 

Auto_aim1

MeisaMcCaffrey
Rules for stoning? That image is scary as hell. Sends a chill down my spine. Things like this shouldn't exist in 2015.
 

Christopher

Member
Can you imagine any human who had to deal through this...??? I don't want anyone telling me to be tolerant of fuckjng stupid views that encompasses this bullshit again
 
Sharia law actually makes a lot of sense in context of its implementation and execution in lands that are largely tribal And devoid of a central governing body.

The problem is the ridiculous laws and the brutal punishments for breaking them. If you take them out, Sharia is actually a good system for smaller communities and tribes to settle disputes among its citizens. Unfortunately removing this sort of shit from Sharia law probably will never happen.

Nevermind the punishment, in democracies adultery is not a crime in the first place.
 

Xexros

Banned
Never actually read anything on the structure of sharia have you?

Just got to the parts about the ridiclous crimes and absurd punishments?

I don't understand your point? You're saying it would be good...except for all the bad that's in it. Ok.jpg

It's good for small tribes with no governments. Neat. This is 2015 and Saudi Arabia is no small village. None of that nonsense has a place in this day and age. But ok
 

ElTorro

I wanted to dominate the living room. Then I took an ESRAM in the knee.
Is this because of their religious views...? Honest question here.

The Qur'an mentions the following as punishment for adultery.

Qur'an 24:2 said:
This is a sura We have sent down and made obligatory: We have sent down clear revelations in it, so that you may take heed. Strike the adulteress and the adulterer one hundred times. Do not let compassion for them keep you from carrying out God’s law—if you believe in God and the Last Day—and ensure that a group of believers witnesses the punishment.

There are countless mentioning of stoning in the Hadith (which are, if accepted as authentic, authoritative examples from the life of the Prophet), for instance this one from the most respected collection of Hadith.

Sahih al-Bukhari 1329 said:
The Jew brought to the Prophet (ﷺ) a man and a woman from amongst them who have committed (adultery) illegal sexual intercourse. He ordered both of them to be stoned (to death), near the place of offering the funeral prayers beside the mosque."
 

ElTorro

I wanted to dominate the living room. Then I took an ESRAM in the knee.
Literally half a billion or so of savages. Disgusting.

The vast majority of them will probably just nod to what they have been told. There is likely a lot of societal pressure to conform with religious doctrine, as well as no culture of critical thinking about these laws. Most of them are very likely decent people who have been told that they'd go to hell if they do not blindly accept this religious barbarism.
 

PillarEN

Member
That infographic. Interesting to know how it is carried out.

The rock size part is like some bizarro "Three Bears" fairy tale. This one is too small, this one is too big, and this one is juuuuust right. Jesus.

And here is a random white doctor... why would he ever stop the stoning periodically? If there is no choice just get it over with as fast as possible. Don't stop it to prolong the suffering. Ahhhh the thought of the length sends shivers down my spine.

Finally, why have the men be buried only waste high and the women up to their shoulders? Is it it some kind of thought process of "we don't want to be hitting female breasts"?
 
Lovely "country". But they buy a lot of weapons from the west (UK's #1 customer in that regard) so they can carry on. And remember that Assad and Iran are bad, because reasons.

Wait a while though, if Russia and Iran prevail in Syria, SA will find themselves at a severe disadvantage in the future with newly powerful enemies right on their doorstep. Revolution will follow.
 

Sky Chief

Member
The vast majority of them will probably just nod to what they have been told. There is likely a lot of societal pressure to conform with religious doctrine, as well as no culture of critical thinking about these laws. Most of them are very likely decent people who have been told that they'd go to hell if they do not blindly accept this religious barbarism.

Or they know that if they identify it as barbarism and choose to leave a barbaric tradition that they will be sentenced to death which is disgusting
 

Sayah

Member
This blog is a good read.
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/09/quran-doesnt-call-for-stoning-experts-insist/

"Stoning is not a Quranic punishment, it is Islamic jurisprudence. It happened later," says Mir-Hosseini, an expert on Iranian family law at London's School of Oriental and African Studies. "The punishment for any kind of sexual relations (outside of marriage) in the Quran is 100 lashes," she says.

Stoning is based on sayings from the Prophet Mohammed, known collectively as the hadith, says Mohammed Ali Musawi, a research fellow at the Quilliam Foundation, which describes itself as an "anti-extremist think tank."

Under the letter of Islamic law, it's nearly impossible to prove adultery, he says.

"How you prove adultery or fornication is to have four male witnesses - or two women for every male equivalent - all of them known to be upright, with no questions about their moral character, who witnessed the actual act of intercourse between the male and the female," he says.

"Basically, in normal life, this is next to impossible, to have four people testify that in the same place, at the same time, they saw the act of penetration,"
he argues.

False testimony can itself be punished with whipping, he says, because "it is such a severe sin."

"As you can imagine, if people were following these laws as they are stated, there would be next to no stonings," he says.

Even if someone confesses to serious sexual impropriety, they should be sent away three times to reconsider their confessions, he says, and only punished if they have admitted it four times, he adds.
 

Mohonky

Member
Nevermind the punishment, in democracies adultery is not a crime in the first place.

Yes, I did mention that it has ridiculous laws. Both much of the laws and the punishments have no place in modern society and aspects such as the weighting of reliability in testimony being in favour of males while discriminating against women and non-muslims continued to point out that that this is a system that has failed to adapt in any way shape or form with a progressive society.

However it's basic structure and implementation is actually in many ways a good frame work for societies that don't have a centralised governance or legal system; at its core it deals with many matters quickly and in a fashion that achieves outcomes desirable to all parties involved where our more western system could see simple matters be prolonged for years and never actually see a resolution. Its that aspect that makes sharia a desirable system, especially in smaller communities. Its more direct, relies on the parties involved directly and it negates a long drawn out convoluted mess that a western court system can sometimes become.

Unfortunately, many people who are fighting for sharia are also the ones that also want to follow word for word the crimes and punishments equivalent to the era in which sharia was introduced; hence the ridiculous laws and outrageously barbaric punishments.
 

G.ZZZ

Member
Lovely "country". But they buy a lot of weapons from the west (UK's #1 customer in that regard) so they can carry on. And remember that Assad and Iran are bad, because reasons.

Wait a while though, if Russia and Iran prevail in Syria, SA will find themselves at a severe disadvantage in the future with newly powerful enemies right on their doorstep. Revolution will follow.

Revolution already happened in saudi arabia. They were much more liberal before , then the clergy and the fanatics forced the government to become more and more stricts because "we are the real holders of the islam, the keeper of the holy mecca etc...". I don't know if i want another revolution there anytime soon.

A revolution however will happen, but not now. It will as petrol become more and more irrilevant with the years. Unless the saudis actually create a modern society, a society whose wealth derive only from oil and where large parts of the population can't work because of "ethical" reasons is not a society that can compete in the globalized world.
 

G.ZZZ

Member
Yes, I did mention that it has ridiculous laws. Both much of the laws and the punishments have no place in modern society and aspects such as the weighting of reliability in testimony being in favour of males while discriminating against women and non-muslims continued to point out that that this is a system that has failed to adapt in any way shape or form with a progressive society.

However it's basic structure and implementation is actually in many ways a good frame work for societies that don't have a centralised governance or legal system; at its core it deals with many matters quickly and in a fashion that achieves outcomes desirable to all parties involved where our more western system could see simple matters be prolonged for years and never actually see a resolution. Its that aspect that makes sharia a desirable system, especially in smaller communities. Its more direct, relies on the parties involved directly and it negates a long drawn out convoluted mess that a western court system can sometimes become.

Unfortunately, many people who are fighting for sharia are also the ones that also want to follow word for word the crimes and punishments equivalent to the era in which sharia was introduced; hence the ridiculous laws and outrageously barbaric punishments.

Humans don't live in tribes anywhere but in places where life expentacies isn't over 50. Why would "something desiderable for tribes" be a good argument for anything, especially LAW which work only for the specific context where it is created? What the fuck.
 

Mohonky

Member
Humans don't live in tribes anywhere but in places where life expentacies isn't over 50. Why would "something desiderable for tribes" be a good argument for anything, especially LAW which work only for the specific context where it is created? What the fuck.

How much travelling have you done?
 

mattiewheels

And then the LORD David Bowie saith to his Son, Jonny Depp: 'Go, and spread my image amongst the cosmos. For every living thing is in anguish and only the LIGHT shall give them reprieve.'
So why don't they stone the guy, too?
 

dakun

Member
Yes, I did mention that it has ridiculous laws. Both much of the laws and the punishments have no place in modern society and aspects such as the weighting of reliability in testimony being in favour of males while discriminating against women and non-muslims continued to point out that that this is a system that has failed to adapt in any way shape or form with a progressive society.

However it's basic structure and implementation is actually in many ways a good frame work for societies that don't have a centralised governance or legal system; at its core it deals with many matters quickly and in a fashion that achieves outcomes desirable to all parties involved where our more western system could see simple matters be prolonged for years and never actually see a resolution. Its that aspect that makes sharia a desirable system, especially in smaller communities. Its more direct, relies on the parties involved directly and it negates a long drawn out convoluted mess that a western court system can sometimes become.

Unfortunately, many people who are fighting for sharia are also the ones that also want to follow word for word the crimes and punishments equivalent to the era in which sharia was introduced; hence the ridiculous laws and outrageously barbaric punishments.
you still haven't made a single convincing point for Sharia to be implemented anywhere. Even if you're granted the unrealistic hope that it'll ever be separated from all the BS (which at that point we might as well not call it Sharia anymore)

The single biggest reason Sharia is more "direct" and "negates a drawn out process" is because in places like Saudi Arabia it doesn't matter if the person being prosecuted is even guilty of said crime. There is no effort being made to prove someones innocence or guilt in most cases there. It's a quick process because it isn't a fair one.
 
Revolution already happened in saudi arabia. They were much more liberal before , then the clergy and the fanatics forced the government to become more and more stricts because "we are the real holders of the islam, the keeper of the holy mecca etc...". I don't know if i want another revolution there anytime soon.

A revolution however will happen, but not now. It will as petrol become more and more irrilevant with the years. Unless the saudis actually create a modern society, a society whose wealth derive only from oil and where large parts of the population can't work because of "ethical" reasons is not a society thatt can compete in the globalized world.

Globally depressed oil prices (which ain't getting better inside of at least the next 18 months) coupled with the first budget deficit in many years, says that the regime are on thin ice in terms of keeping the population happy. If they can't buy peace using oil revenues they are in trouble.
 

LordDash

Banned
Humans don't live in tribes anywhere but in places where life expentacies isn't over 50. Why would "something desiderable for tribes" be a good argument for anything, especially LAW which work only for the specific context where it is created? What the fuck.

Saudi Arabia is basically a Tribal Land. Everything here revolves around the tribal culture. From laws to entertainment.
 

Betty

Banned
Islam needs to undergo a severe enlightenment soon, forget terrorism, the daily things like honour killings, rape shaming, acid throwing, political corruption, homophobia and flat out medieval cruelty needs to be addressed because it's lowers us all.
 

ElTorro

I wanted to dominate the living room. Then I took an ESRAM in the knee.
This is what I don'the get. Islam teaches about both Jesus and Muhammad, but their view and usage of stoning are the complete opposite.

The famous saying attributed to Jesus about casting the first stone is a late interpolation that was added in later editions of that gospel. Even if you accept that there is any historical knowledge about a figure named Jesus, that saying is not part of it. And even without that information, Islam rejects much of what Christianity says as misguided. They accept Jesus as a prophet, but they do not share contemporary mainstream Christian views about the character of Jesus.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom