Somali woman stoned for adultery

Source: Beeb

A 20-year-old woman accused of committing adultery in Somalia has been stoned to death by Islamists in front of a crowd of about 200 people.

A judge working for the militant group al-Shabab said she had had an affair with an unmarried 29-year-old man.

He said she gave birth to a still-born baby and was found guilty of adultery. Her boyfriend was given 100 lashes.

It is thought to be the second time a woman has been stoned to death for adultery by al-Shabab

Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8364858.stm

---

"A 13-year-old girl was stoned to death for adultery in the southern town of Kismayo last year, although human rights groups said she had been raped".

Just recoiling in horror each time atrocities like this are in the news.

Makes no sense.

of the USA's moral superiority? :evilgrin:

is superior to one that would stone a 13 year old rape victim under the guise of adultery? I have no such problem. Somalia is a shithole.

to help stabilize their country. If we were THAT dirt poor, you and I, NOW feeling all warm, well fed ... all around general SUPERIOR, wouldn't hesitate to rob each other. Hardly "a superior" action, aye?

I think you are confusing the term "superior" with "spoiled" and/or "wealthy"?

But I think our days of World Police are over.

are presently cutting deals to help Columbia destabilize Venezuela.

No, we're not "the world's police" but merely the Masters of War FUNDERS and SLAVE LABOR. We serve the Defense Contractors in their quest to acquire other nation's blessed natural resources.

Come on, President Obama fully knows who he's working for ... and it's not The American People. :evilgrin:

Come on, President Obama fully knows who he's working for ... and it's not The American People. :thumbsup:

Let the UN take its intended role or let a few countries that don't have soaring deficits help out.

This is the sort of thing the UN was built to address. If we can help with a vote in a UN resolution or something, then we should. We could even draft a resolution ourselves. But we are in no position anymore to preach to other countries about their societal shortcomings and offer resources to help, even when it is as obvious as this situation. We are despised by everyone and flat broke. It's a damned shame.

that have both the means and the political will to deal with this sort of thing.

Maybe China. They have a pretty robust economy right now.

and as a more or less dictatorship the will to get involved. But I would be highly suspect of their intentions in any human rights campaign, as they don't treat their own citiens like people.

offshore to Dubai. I wonder how much longer we will be the masters of War funding....

:sarcasm: And puppet sex just seems wrong on so many levels!!

but I see Gary raising his hands in the air -- one of our favorite distress signals....

people are loathe to decry anything untoward that happens in a Muslim nation. While Christians get bashed 24/7 and nobody says boo, Islam is given a pass and cries of cultural relativism abound.

Also, apparently, according to some of our posters, since we are not a perfect society, we simply cannot speak out against those who think this kind of justice is just honky dorey. That just wouldn't do at all (I think that attitude is pathetic but that's just my opinion - I have no problem calling animals animals).

is there something you would like to tell the class?

But I guess that doesn't apply to women...?! Shame on you. Oy! Such a shonda.

That guys message really pissed me off. How are you????

Maybe we just hang out in different places. I seldom get out of the "Greatest" page.

as caring human beings? There's much that we could(and should) do besides 'policing'.O8)

Our own country is sliding down the tubes. Let some of the donothing countries that are well off pitch in for a change.

My main problem with modern day liberalism is our unwillingness to assert the moral justness of our views. Being liberal and tolerant is a morally superior way of life and culture than the evil oppressive brutality as practiced in the news story here.

I have no problem asserting that.

I don't understand why people are afraid to judge other cultures. I think it's some sort of white guilt, combined with some BS suspicion that we are somehow to blame. We are not.

Count me now as TOTALLY CREEPED OUT! :puke:

by your apparent view that condemning the stoning to death of women for adultery is "lame jingoism". :puke::puke::puke:

because we all know *wink wink* that this boils down to the other term, "white privilege" I'm not still trying to find my way among all those SCARY brown and black peoples of this world. :eyes:

You have no idea but it's very unattractive to claim "White Guilt" at places other than right wing or white supremacists sites.

Perhaps the place has changed, but I don't think you will glean too much sympathy here. But nonetheless, it's not inappropriate to type, "It was awful WHITE of you to do so." :wtf: :thumbsdown:

Are you sure that you are comfortable among all us UNABASHED liberals here at DU?

Obama? Do you think he was elected because of our WHITE GUILT?

:puke:

No, I don't believe in "white guilt" the way white wingers do. But, I do believe that lot's of people, including at this site, seem to not want to condemn barbaric practices in the Middle East and other places over some concern that maybe we have always treated them right. That's true, but it's not why they stone people to death.

<Jeopardy Theme>

That is totally irrelevant. The fact is that over the last few hundred years our society has developed a liberal attitude that people have rights, that people make mistakes and shouldn't be killed for minor infractions, in most of the west that people shouldn't be executed at all, etc.

The fact is that in the middle east those cultural advancements have largely not occurred, and to the extent that they did up until 1950 or so are in many places being reversed.

So what happened 5,000 years ago simply is pertinent to this conversation.

And yes, you will now cite example of how the west is bad, as if that somehow negates the overall point.

I have an idea: How about I pay you to fly to Somalia to explain to these gentleman how enlightened you are and that while you support homosexual rights and abortion you don't think any less of them as cultural because they don't.

Let me know how that goes for you, or, have a relative drop me a line in case you don't return.

to rule with an Iron Fist.

It's our predatory capitalism and "mischief" in The Middle East and Latin America that have contributed to the high ILLITERACY and ABJECT POVERTY.

Of course peoples of these countries can NOT evolve as representative governments when we prefer to put our private corporations in charge of their natural resources ... have a few native ULTRA WEALTHY and keep the rest of the populace dirt poor.

Is it any wonder they can NOT develop when we put a strangle-hold on their resources and force them to Privatize with the profits going to a small number of elites?

No, there's nothing inherently SUPERIOR about our culture, free trade or capitalistic system. It serves "but a few" as more and more Middle Class Americans are finding out what it feels like to drop into POVERTY.

No Sir, we are not culturally superior as long as we force other nations to bend to our financial will. That only adds to the resentment and increased destitution.

p.s. Although I'm a woman, I trained with men in preparation for Ranger School, I've graduated from US Army Airborne School, I've lived in Central America (unemployment 75%) for two years and I was born in the Middle East (of American Parents). Therefore, if we were both *dropped* into Somalia for a year, IMO, the "smart money" would bet on my survival over yours. :evilgrin:

You can list all of the exploitation in the world, yet it does not explain middle-age ethics. There has been grinding poverty in much of the western world in the last two hundred years, and still we didn't stone people.

You have this need to feel superior. Hey, if you're basically ambulatory, there are Contractors over in Afghanistan that would LOVE to have you. Why don't you go over there and show those little brown people how to behave civilized?

Don't hesitate ... Go now! :eyes:

that don't stone women and give them clitorectomies.

Why do you have such a hard problem simply stating that this culture that they are living is warped and immoral?

I have no problem asserting the moral supremacy of liberalsim, and what it has done for the world. Liberalizing the world would do great things for millions of people, as it already has for millions.

But, no, I don't believe in doing it at gunpoint, so I won't be going over there to do that.

I am not going to debate you any longer - we're going around in circles and it serves no useful purpose.

Have a nice day. Signed - A SnF White Woman born in The Middle East. :silly:

So you are willing to judge teabagggers, but not people who stone women? LOL.

the tea-bag culture as being every bit as relevant as our own. Better even.

To judge them is to imply that you are different, which means you feel superior, which means you are claiming to have never done anything wrong ever which is basically the same as declaring them non-humans and rounding them up in to death camps. Shame on you.

this gets to the heart of the matter. america and americans rarely take responsibility for the misery that has been created by our government, mostly for the enrichment of corporations. we keep doing the same thing over and over and over again, and we seem to expect a different result...the definition of insanity. i condemn this act of murder, but america has no moral authority.

to cast judgements. What are you doing that is in anyway different than other DUers to accept responsibility for your govt's actions?

is a fairly empty concept. If someone or something is said to have 'moral authority' it usually means that its failings are kept out of sight.

However moral authority can and does arise spontaneously in groups because a particular person may have specialized knowledge pertainent to the issue at hand. If it does arise spontaneously it is meaningful, but it is meaningless when something or someone is pegged as being one.

IMO the world doesn't need a 'moral authority' to be told how to behave, that can be accomplished by debate.

with Western Civilization's MORAL superiority.

Or have your forgotten "The Inquisition?"

because it is happening right now just like these stonings!

Upstate NY. :)

say by an extremist cult out in the midwest, I don't suppose anyone would be defending them by equating their actions to some muslim atrocity that is far worse (allegedly).

As is these black muslims are being defended by deflecting the blame on to white christians.

It does seem a race/religion based double standard.

White christian zealots = evil.

Black muslim zealots = OMG! the US is so much worse, we can't point fingers, morally no different than . . . ., jingoism, gitmo, blah blah blah.

is coming UP? :puke:

as in all whites are guilty.

Your first instinctual reaction to a story about black muslims brutally murdering a woman was to go after a predominately white and christian nation.

If someone immediately blames the jews for anything bad they read in the news we would call that person an anti-semite. If they go for blacks as the scape goat we call them a racist. Gays, homophobe and so on. Or for that matter if the first response to a white criminal being caught is "well, black folks do this way more so that barely even registers" then they go off on a rant about how awful blacks are and how criminal prone they are.

So what do we call someone who sees all the worlds problems as being either related to or surpassed by white folks?

blue eyes, I do not HATE myself. :spray:

perhaps you only hate white men, who knows? But you clearly have issues if your first thought on this subject was "the US is to blame".

And yes, I would have the same reaction to anyone who felt the need to blame muslims in response to christian extremism (yeah the OKC bombing was bad, but nothing like 911, I don't see how people can condemn mcveigh when muslims have done so much worse).

:crazy:

has there been as a result of this stoning?

I suggest you go read threads about christian terrorists. You will not find moral equivalence being used to defend them. You will find blatant stereotyping of all christians. You will never read a comment about how muslims are far worse (as those are discouraged or blocked pretty quickly).

Hey, I'm just one little non-practicing Catholic woman who's disgusted with all the posturing.

Yes, it's horrific that a young woman was stoned to death in Somalia.

HOWEVER, let's get REAL NOW - This thread has little to nothing to do with her or her situation.

We all know the "dirty hidden agenda" is to degrade those within the Muslim faith?

Come on, that's what MANY posting here want - hatred toward Muslims.

Go ahead and continue to deny it but I think thou protesth too much.

That's frightening. I suppose stories of christians or jews misbehaving and invoking their religion are likewise lies to make people hate members of those religions? Or are only stories about muslims acting barbaric made up?

"HOWEVER, let's get REAL NOW - This thread has little to nothing to do with her or her situation."


You're right, the OP never even mentioned her or her situation.

I'm not naive. Yes, I truly believe that if your raise the standard of living for Women, Children and Old Men, the native peoples will, with time, develop a just and lawful system within more tribal lands.

No, I'm not willing to judge other cultures although "stoning" and "disfigurement" are horrific acts. They are aberrations of a sound culture. They can be discontinued with education and encouragement. It's not SIMPLE but it's the only viable way to help make a better life for those residing within impoverished countries.

so you have judged them, you just aren't willing to admit it yet.

"They are aberrations of a sound culture. "

What evidence do you have that it is a sound culture? It's respect for women in other areas? Universal suffrage? Respect for basic human rights? Religious/racial/ethnic tolerance?

"They can be discontinued with education and encouragement."

So their already "sound" culture can be fixed by altering it significantly and training the people to behave differently than their culture currently instructs them to behave. Sounds like it's flawed to begin with, otherwise it wouldn't need fixing.

Duh.

At least that's what you see some of around here as the accepted opinion.

Like the folks who couldn't just criticize Lieberman's idiocy about HCR, but had to drag his religion into it. Or those that like to bring up the ME every time some anti-semite does something anywhere.

There are plenty of anti-semites on the left and the right.

without regard to Human Rights, I worry!

What's wrong with the simple concept of believing that ALL bigotry is wrong, no matter who it's aimed at? It's a concept that seems to have eluded you, considering the Muslim-hating site you joined up at....

Yeah. Our culture is totally superior to those barbarians.

:eyes:

But your outrage against the US for this barbaric stoning has been duly noted.

Actually, it's been duly noted for a while, but we appreciate the reminder.

blame the good ol' US of A for that as well. ;-)

Nice use of the "Blame America First" card. Good luck with this year's War on Christmas...

is to blame america for something that had nothing to do with the US whatsoever, what would you call that?

Oh but you invoked the O word, I guess I should bow out. :rofl:

You may notice that I never blamed anyone for anything. I merely pointed out that our "superior" culture has some 'splainin to do.

Or are you one of those "we don't torture" apologists?

that an intellectually honest person would be able to answer.

On a thread about the OKC bombing, if I were to post pictures of the world trade centers being attacked on 9/11 and say "yeah, christians are so evil compared to them :eyes:" would that be construed as a constructive input, or defending radical christian terrorists while at the same time trying to tear down muslims unfairly?

If you're a Muslim responding to another Muslim's critique of Christians, it would probably be considered healthy self-criticism. And then some oversensitive apologist will probably accuse you of adopting a "Blame Islam First" mentality.

In this case, we are more likely to be able to do something about OUR atrocities than we are about Somalia's. Once we remove the beam from our eye, we can talk about the mote in our neighbor's.

I see that rule does not apply to christians.

"And then some oversensitive apologist will probably accuse you of adopting a "Blame Islam First" mentality."

You really aren't getting this are you?

Ok, I'll try a different tact. If some user post stats on how many blacks commit crimes in the US on every post about crimes committed by whites as a way of denigrating the former and defending the latter, how long until that person was declared a racist?

I'll be waiting for the prosecution of those who stoned that girl

Nope, we're too busy looking forward.

:thumbsup:

They don't want our help, thats the problem. They want that system because it gives them power. Sure, they will take our money and aid, but they do not want to change their system.

Tyson Foods, for one, brought over hundreds of Somalian refugees "as is" to work in a Tennessee food plant. Virtual slaves destined to work for Tyson Foods forever and live in isolation given their near total ignorance of American language and culture.

I suspect that many of big gov's supposedly humanitarian refugee programs exist simply to provide cover for big biz looking to exploit poor people.

PS. Under the guise of humanitarianism big gov probably also reimburses Tyson for payroll and medical expenses pertaining to refugees. Big (neo) slavers never had it so good.

stoning a rape victim to death? Or sentencing someone to 100 lashes? Fucking barbarians.

intact, right in the middle of America. Think of it as "Little Somolia."

This thread is about a specific penalty for a specific crime. Are you saying the US government is killing women for commiting adultery (when they are in reality rape victims). If you're not, you're just trying to change the subject.

We should gather them and keep them together so they won't do anything to Americans again!

Are we going there?

Like we did with Japanese Americans during WWII?

I hope NOT.

and each state legislature to keep the abomination that is sharia out of America. Do you see it creeping in where you live? And if so, what are you doing to shine a light on it?

None is better than another. Western Civilization is no more progressive, open, and tolerant than than the Islamic societies. We should be celebrating this as an example of diversity. Who are we to impose OUR values on them? :sarcasm:

sarcasm thingy. In case my position was not clear in other comments, I'm not one of the progressives that believe all cultures are equal. Some are clearly superior and I have no problem saying that out loud.

I agree with you! My sarcasm was directed at those who dont..

That there are those that wouldn't have realized you were being sarcastic without the thingy is what is sad.

the question is pertinent - why WOULD anyone unrec a thread discussing the stoning of a woman for having sex ?

We should not get stuck in the trap of pious guilt over our own advantage (and it's pious in that it's about making ourselves feel better and allows us to think of ourselves as moral) leading us to abandon an objective ethical structure. Sorry, but I don't support the status quo, I do what I can to neutralize its unethical behaviors, using the resources which my position in it gives me. If the response to that is, that by being a member you're compromised to it, well, then, let's shut down DU cause we'll all have to give up our internet access, in addition to our cars, homes, grocery stores, jobs, etc. and live in tents and walk everywhere, and find some clean streams or springs for water. Who's ready to sign up ?

There are objective questions of universal cultural values present in this story, as in so much of the event stream coming from the developing world. The fact that the West exploited those regions for 350 years doesn't suffice as an explanation, nevermind a justification, for why after achieving independence, often hard-won by truly ethical people (think Shah Masoud) those regions on average have pervasively corrupt societies and therefore governments. Frequently when there are no natural resources which would lead the west to turn a particular area into a controlled zombie state.

No, rather, there is a universal question at work here: does the group have the right to subordinate individual freedoms to the perceived optimization of group socioeceonomic advantage ? Which is what control of womens' sexuality (which in turn results in the control of men's sexuality) is really about. Or is the notion of fundamental individual rights inviolate, which include life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. So that society needs to organize itself around autonomous ethical individuals who deliberately choose to collaborate in a community, rather than demanding that those individuals subordinate themselves to a group in order to receive some marginal advantage from membership in a tribe whose power structure is usually based on crude force and domination (and the concomitant ignorance, fear and greed).

The loudest mouths frequently are the likeliest to occupy leadership positions, and usually the least suited to do so.

And for my part, living in the privileged context of the west gives me no compunctions about pointing that out about others, as I do about ourselves.

And further, a little cultural anthropology raises interesting questions about assorted cultural value sets, the above tribal ones as well as other more advanced ones which demand more rigor and self-control (responsibility for being ethical and for participating) from the participants, but deliver more in terms of individual and collective quality of life.

This is about choices for the species, and since we can't stop breeding (another ethical choice facing many different cultures and their value sets) the reality that what one community does affects the others becomes more concrete with every day (with every birth).

So let's not shy away from calling a spade a spade, shall we ?

Sure, why don't we parachute you in there to live with "the natives" for a year or so?

I guarantee, you'll rediscover the base of the pyramid of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. In other words, you will EITHER do morally abhorrent acts OR you will not survive.

I can say with confidence that NOT ONE of us would survive in such an environment without joining a group of thugs, doing very immoral things ... and we WOULD even consider stoning a woman and/or keeping silent if OUR SURVIVAL depended on it.

As unpleasant as the thought is, we'd either succumb to such immorality of a thuggish warlord, or we'd DIE of starvation and/or be murdered by those who OBEY.

to tyrants and many have died to preserve ideals but those ideals have to be there in the first place. People, both poor and wealthy have throughout history said no to thuggery and have paid the price.

Often people looked to religion for inspiration and ideals worth fighting for and preserving, but in the case of women's rights, gay rights, human rights, democratic rights religions have added nothing in fact they have been hostile to such rights.

It is religion that inculcates obedience and unquestioned respect for authority.

I know that this may be a stupid question, but isn't that the purpose of unrec? I know that if I really liked a post or really agreed with it, I click the recommend. Wouldn't the reverse also apply? I haven't unrecommended any stories yet, but I am assuming that this would be the purpose of the button. I am guessing that I am wrong, but not sure why. :) Perhaps you, or somebody, can clarify.

its not really a dislike button. its a "doesnt deserve to be on greatest page" button

That's why DU is a DISCUSSION FORUM. It's for debate of the issues of the day. If folks only rec'd good news or stories they like, we'd have nothing but puppy threads on the greatest page.

On DU we confront all the issues and some of those may make us feel uncomfortable or even outrage us. As La Lioness said, the unrec button is not designed to be a dislike button and I agree with her. Some of the very best discussions here are generated by raw truths that engage those here in rather painful journeys of self-examination. I've learned a great deal more during those times when I would rather have turned away from an unpleasant topic or an issue for which the answers may seem morally ambiguous.

in a capital crime, or whether you committed the capital crime.

Question: During the same time period, how many women were killed in the world for adultery, but it was not reported because it didn't involve "Islamists"?

Betcha jealousy gets a lot of folks killed here in the USA.

is as evil as free-lance western murder which at one time (and fairly recently) had a sort of social sanctioning when related to sexual constancy.

Well put. I couldn't find the CORRECT words to phrase it. Thanks! :-)

is pro-woman.

The alternatives are to either A) completely ignore this (how is that pro-woman?) or B) endorse it as a vibrant and moral culture no different than our own (that certainly won't help the women there either).

It's nauseating in the extreme to see the same handful of overly loud posters turn up time and time again in threads that give them a chance to give their hatred of Muslims a bit of a whirl, and to try to cover up the stench of their bigotry by pretending they care so much about women and that's why they're posting. Bullshit. These people never show any concern at all when the woman or society isn't a Muslim one. What's done to these women like the one in the OP is totally appalling and sickening, but I'm not sure why some of the usual suspects in this thread see this as little more than an opportunity to trill away about how some cultures are superior to others....

an institution that is, for some reason, above criticism around here.

It's an uncomfortable position to be in when we criticize another religion or culture.

are simply ideas and ideas should be scrutinized. Scrutinizing ideas does not mean one hasn't the right to hold them. If ideas are in the public realm than they are fair game to be looked at. If someone adheres to a religion that bars criticism that's all well and good for adherents but it doesn't bar other people from debating an idea's merit.

One could divorce the humanity from it (ignoring the fact that a young woman died) and simply treat it as a sociological phenomenon. That would put enough distance to make it a more comfortable stance to use in taking a critical view.

And unlike the death of Neda Soltani, there's no in-your-face video going viral that shows the incident.

religion? Ignore the crucial fact that death by stoning is part of Sharia Law? To ignore that glaring fact would be intellectually dishonest.

It's less complicated to do when one is talking about distant historic events over which we can't possibly have any effect.

Should MLK have only addressed prejudice that occured in biblical times because it would have been less complicated?

I was just trying to make a comparision between time and distance.

"Injustice anywhere in america is a threat to justice everywhere in america."

so we could all condemn their religious fanaticism instead of having to embrace and attempt to understand their rich, vibrant culture that in no way needs to change.

Or jewish settlers, that would have worked well.

:puke:

they are perfect and wonderful and we are the ones who need to change to better understand and appreciate their culture, not the other way around.

To insinuate that any culture/religion/country out there is in anyway less than flawless other than our culture/christianity/the US is blatant bigotry and should not be tolerated.

:sarcasm:

I am always taken aback when people make the argument that critiquing other cultures is wrong but I soon realize they are dead serious. I thought you were one of them :)

vs spoken, you lose the inflection, it makes subtlety more difficult. And of course I'm typing things as I would say them so I hear it the way I would say it in my head, but not everyone is going to read it the same way.

I really need to remember the tag more often.

group. What they do is not accepted practice in most Islamic societies. I would also like to point out the fact that contrary to some beliefs here, the interpretation of Sharia differs also. IOW there are differences in Islamic schools of jurisprudence.

Some are very liberal, and some are not.....as you see. Most would not agree with this interpretation at all.

by most christians. It is still branded as an unforgivable act committed by christian extremists and a natural result of that religions intolerance.


Can't be both ways.

I'd at least have some respect for you if you were as condemning of other religious extremists the way you are with Muslims...

btw, I haven't seen anyone here at DU tell people they should embrace any sort of religious extremism. Given some of the false things you've claimed in the past, I'll write this one off as bullshit unless you can start coming up with links to posts where we're being asked to embrace religious extremism....

It's easy to do it.

I have both reced and unreced threads on accident, but not this thread.

* peer pressure
* dislike of the post
* unable to do a thing about the contents of the post
* dislike of the poster
* person voting didn't eat breakfast
* person voting didn't get laid

Lots of other reasons.

But I don't think they have oil, do they?

THING AS SAYING WE SHOULD INVADE THE COUNTRIES WHERE THEY TAKE PLACE.

From my limited vantage at my screen here, it appears you expend by far the most emotion on the idea that it's nobody's business whether women get stoned to death by fundies in Somalia.

Personally, I find the plight of such women to be what's worthy of my complete revulsion and emotion, and it makes me think about what I can do about it.

Islam could use a reformation... Pigs!

We have NO right to claim ANY moral high ground here since we still occupy TWO MUSLIM countries.

We're such DAMN hypocrites. If it happens TO US, it's *TERRORISM* but when We Do It to OTHERS who are INNOCENT, It's *DoublePlusGood.* :crazy:

you're the one that practices hypocrisy day in and day out.

assumptions of my person are way off base.

any atrocity that doesn't happen in the U.S. It's a remarkably absurd position to take, and I'll continue to point that out in clear and simple language. Don't like it? Tough.

just continue to feel "entitled." :shrug:

I'm genuinely touched as such open and generous discussion rarely occurs on message boards.

BTW, I tend to be a too blunt at times. If my strong wording put you off that way, I too am sorry. :hi:

:hi:

wow what insight you must have

doesn't do the same about killing women? Pigs have more protection than women.

Exit, Stage LEFT. :nuke:

clear injustice. The Koran is an imaginative work by a human. What effing angel would dictate stoning?

address that fact that that the Koran affords pigs better protection than women speak volumes. Tell why the Koran makes pork eating haram but not stoning?

All those Ancient Religious Traditions have practical intentions--for instance, eating uncooked pork (and if you were on the run from people trying to kill you, you wouldn't light cooking fires) causes trichinosis, which is a terrible thing to have. So instead of saying "you shouldn't eat pork because it will make you sick and perhaps kill you," they just said "Allah doesn't want you to."

healthy? The Chinese for instance have been eating pork for thousands of years, they haven't died out and Christians certainly haven't become extinct eating pork. That dietary law coming from Judaism is a neurotic fixation. If God was concerned about trichinosis he could have just advised Muslims to cook it well.

The Chinese? They didn't have any mass migrations in their history. If you live your entire life in a ten-mile radius of your birthplace, you've got time to cook.

at the time the books were written but this is the XXI century.

One would think Allah might have just told them to cook pork to a certain temperature, or explain Germ Theory.

But no: "He hath only forbidden you dead meat, and blood, and the flesh of swine, and that on which any other name hath been invoked besides that of Allah. But if one is forced by necessity, without wilful disobedience, nor transgressing due limits,- then is he guiltless. For Allah is Oft-forgiving Most Merciful."

Shows how very HUMAN the ramblings of the Koran (and Old Testament) are.

Someone once told me, "God never changes." That's actually not true: if you go through the Mosaic Laws, one of the things you will not eat is shellfish. Now come to Fayettenam in about two weeks and check out the church fundraisers: they LOVE their oyster roasts.

And y'know, if the Muslims want to not eat pigs that's perfectly fine with me. What's NOT fine is them treating women as third-class citizens.

It's obvious you've never read the Koran, because you've never even read your Bible. A few chapters of the Old Testament should set you straight.

no uncertain terms that women should not be stoned.

God would certainly have been aware while the Koran was being dictated that stoning was a practice and that it would become part of Sharia law so why given he is merciful did he not make a definitive statement not to stone women ever under no circumstance.

There is no Muslim on earth who would justify eating pork because the Koran indisputably clear that pork is prohibited. Go anywhere on earth and Muslims whether they are Sunnis or Shias or any other sect do not eat pork - everyone knows its forbidden. So again I ask why isn't stoning haram?

It's the same crap. The Koran is recycled garbage from multiple, garbage religions.

Garbage in-Garbage out.

God declares this once unclean food clean in the following passage in a dream to Peter. Acts 11:4-10

"Peter began and explained everything to them precisely as it had happened:

snip

"The voice spoke from heaven a second time, 'Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.' 10This happened three times, and then it was all pulled up to heaven again."

which is why Jesus' position was so shocking.

to do it for them the bigotry here is simply confounding perhaps you should take a close look at Hinduism and gosh you get the added benefit that they're brown too

the question remains the same, fundamentalist christians or jews are no better but we can see factions inside those communities that condemn the acts committed by some idiots inside those religions.

well in your mind I am sure that does whatever what your posts show me is total ignorance and a bit of bigotry tell me do you know any Muslims or Somali's?

No, I don't know muslims, I know ordinary people which reserve their religious believes for them selves. Most people that I met trying to convert me to their religion have run away as soon as we talk about the history of their churches.

You think Fox news is going to go out and find them?

most likely fox is more sympathetic to those who stoned the young women.

It's just like the Christian religious fundies don't represent every Christian.

But that doesn't mean that we should not stand up for human rights and women's rights. Just because not all Muslims approve of stoning women to death, that doesn't mean that when that barbaric act happens it should not be criticized and we should not work to get this behavior stopped.

Most followers of Islam practice nothing like this perversion.

than to demand actual accountability for the psychos that actually did this.

Sorry you have to pay the price for the angst of others.

was bigotry. And that poster owned up to it, to his/her credit. But those kinds of ugly generalizations are not OK.

Too quick with association of this act with all of Islam. I have a problem with all organized religions, after all they are controlled by weak vessels; humans. Too bad that all the children of Abraham can't get along.

:cry:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Our nation doesn't have a wonderful history with regard to women's rights. In fact, if we allow these blue dogs to push us around, we may have a problem being granted even BIRTH CONTROL not to mention "Choice."

We live in A GLASS HOUSE and have ZERO Moral Standing as we occupy two Muslim countries.

According to you, just because we aren't perfect, we can't speak out against this kind of monstrous behavior? Go put your head in the sand - that'll help the women who have to live under disgusting sharia laws. Don't bother responding - you're ignored.

we WHOLLY slaughtered during the 1960s and 1970s.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7jAT0FAGBc&feature=player_embedded

Bombs will kill women in Afghanistan
Posted by robertgreenwald on July 8th, 2009

Self immolation is a method of suicide by lighting oneself on fire. According to the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan, self immolation has never been such an epidemic in Afghanistan as it is today. This is one fact that leads people to the sobering reality that our efforts in Afghanistan have done nothing for the vast majority of women there.


--------------------------------------
More recently, what about the MONSTROUS "shock and awe" we rained down on IRAQ - a country that had NOTHING to do with 9/11.

You pine about "social justice" while the great American KILLING MACHINE continues to murder thousands upon thousands INNOCENT civilians.

I know this is hard to face, but WE, the USA military has KILLED more innocents than Al Quaeda.

Shhh! The truth hurts, doesn't it? :( That's OK, because those little brown people's lives don't count as much as those of Americans. :sarcasm:

The answers are complex but must focus around raising the standard of living for women, children and old men.

Believe it or not, warmongering and "ink-spot bombing" not to mention summary executions by drone with collateral damage HURTS WOMEN as much as SOCIETAL INJUSTICES.

Here's how you and I can help the Women, Children and Old Men who are left to pick-up the pieces:

http://rethinkafghanistan.com/blog/?p=889

Nevertheless, when I read "Woman stoned for adultery" no one had to tell me it was an Islamic country. What people believe has a direct effect on how they act. If people believe that any sort of sexual expression except a male-dominated marriage renders the woman "impure" and somehow ruined so that there is nothing left to do but dispose of her; that sort of belief tend to create unfortunate results.

which breeds INJUSTICE. No, it's never justified but these people are living from hand to mouth and any Warlord who will promise food and shelter will be obeyed.

When life is barely worth living, people live AFRAID and will do ANYTHING to survive. Yes, even stoning their neighbor if "their leader" ... the one who ensures their family has food and water tells them IT'S JUSTICE.

It's horrific, but we don't live in abject poverty and in a lawless state. That's where DISTORTED Religion and ruthless, often unjust law is practiced to KEEP THE MASSES AFRAID and compliant with the tenuous grasp of authority.

It's wrong and it's horrific but we are NOT THERE.

IMNSHO, it's only through ending POVERTY and DESTITUTION that we can take "the next step" to help people reach a semblance of civilized society.

the people here and in Europe who aren't in poverty and still commit these honor killings? It's a big problem in the UK right now.

of their past cultural ties. It does NOT fit in with their present civilized society.

and start clobbering women with them,

:eyes:


Your moral outrage is noted. Maybe you could identify someone in this world who is qualified to be outraged by what happened, and please remember to include me on your letter condemning them.

I won't hold my breath.

"I know this is hard to face, but WE, the USA military has KILLED more innocents than Al Quaeda."

Patently untrue. The wild violence of 2005-2006 died out in Iraq, because the insurgents were killing civilians indiscriminately. In fact, targeting them, specifically children.

By all means, the United States certainly has a lot of blood on it's hands, but let's not re-write history, ok?

:sarcasm:

Without a site reference - I sadly stand by my post above.

We killed millions with the sanctions as well, long before the war. A lingering, starving death.

But the numbers of civilians killed, that you see cited in the Lancet and others, include civilians killed by insurgents, of various stripes. (Not all insurgents were al-qaeda, I will certainly grant that)

Of course we could also consider that the invasion gave rise to the circumstances in which the insurgents started killing people, so depending on your perspective, your initial statement may be true.

by someone, but only if they're morally cleared to do so.

Because we know how YOU feel, in the comfort of wherever you are. There probably isn't any persecution in the
bedroom/library/coffeeshop/wherever you are.

Stow your self-righteousness.

blood in Mosul ... if they were saved?

when rocks are bouncing off her head.

Odd to see how two wrongs equal a right to some people.

Colour is bullshit and your attempt at smearing people as racist is pathetic and merely reveals the weakness of your position. Anyone who blindly adheres and doesn't question religious beliefs that are patently cruel is as bad if not worse than any war criminal because such people have the audacity to claim a merciful god sanctions their repugnant behaviour.

This is this, not something else!

Oh, 400 years ago is the SAME PHUCKING THING, you say?

Why are you beating people over the head with a baseball bat when they agree with you?:wtf:

We remember their history?

They remember their history, unlike us remembering our's?

Please don't take this wrong but you forgotten the first rule of juggling(which I find is also helpful in everyday life). There is only one ball in your hand. You deal with only one thing at a time, all the other balls in the air are important, but have to wait they turn.

Yes our history is not what we would wish it to be, yes our current political climate not as we would have it(hopefully we are turning a corner), and I myself am not a paragon of virtue; but that doesn't limit me from stating my opinion on matters outside of my control. Doing so actually helps clear up my thoughts on matters that I hopefully can influence8)

I'm not juggling, just attempting to prevent folks from pumping each other up over our perceived superior culture. :(

However, this thread is predictably devolving into an "hate thread" on Muslims.

Mission Accomplished? :eyes:

it seems to be devolving into a contest: Who Walks the Higher Moral Ground?

Only This Weeks Winners™ are allowed to comment on the stoning of women and female children guilty of being penetrated by men.

All entrants will be judged on their judgment quotient by SnF Trebek, your host and judge.

No wrong may be mentioned, let alone addressed by anyone who has had any imperfection in their lives, or even in the past history of their nation of origin.



goddammit, quit beating everyone into the ground with your goodness yardstick and offer positive ideas that could help women living under murderous misogynistic rule. Do something that's helpful, rather than SCREAM at everyone who sees something wrong that they should not see something wrong because they live in a culture that has wronged so it would be wrong to mention wrongs in another culture. :crazy:

But if one reads through the thread, you can catch rotting "whiffs" of those who feel we should be well within our rights to DEGRADE an entire religion.

Gee, I see the hatred of the Muslim culture permeating throughout this thread and yes, I'm far from a genius, but some contents within this thread are quite disquieting, i.e., white guilt.

When do you think there will be rallies on FOX to start rounding up our Muslim neighbors?

If this thread is any indication of the growing *movement* it will come sooner rather than later.

Bookmarking this thread and hoping that I won't have to type, "I told you so."

dogs and pigs. If these other posts exist the Mods should be alerted, I would have done so but I can't find them. Of course it is possible that you are the one viewing people with a distorted lens, that you see only what you want to see.

wish to communicate with you? With respect, I have sadly written off as unreachable. Yet you continue to comment on my posts.

flatter yourself that you have made some majestic attempt to communicate with someone who holds a very different opinion than you but let's be clear there has been no attempt. I asked a straight-forward question which you ignore because you can't answer it.

I asked why Allah didn't make stoning women haram? Eating pork is haram. No Muslim in world eats pork. There is no debate about pork or finding pork allowed in Sharia law.

You say proverty and starvation is to blame for women being stoned. Given their starvation why haven't they thrown aside the injunction against pork? How is they can think clearly about prohibited food but not about ruthless murder?

with much more thoughtfulness and patience than myself to spar with you. Forgive me, I never personally claimed to be superior but your biases irk me. Perhaps one of the few folks who have held similar views to my own may wish to step in at this point? I'm admittedly spent.

With respect and only, IMO, you're so lost, I just can't muster up the effort to go step by step.

Best to you and yours, SnF.

I challenge you to find one instance of prejudice. It must be nice to be able to dismiss people who challenge your views as being prejudice. Yes I do have strong feelings. I'm angry knowing that people are having their heads bashed in with rocks and then read posts rationalizing that behaviour and then condeming criticism as racist.

You are so very concerned about who feels superior. Well in respect to adultery the West is superior, secularism is superior. I'm sure if you were being pounded to death, secularism would seem quite superior to any sort of religion that okayed this behaviour.

given that Muslims think the Koran is god's final word to mankind.

Who has the superiority complex? People who think that all religious texts are products of human imagination and therefore need to be taken with a grain of salt, or people who believe themselves to be in possession of God's final word to mankind?

Gosh it's hard to decide who has the superiority complex.:sarcasm:

The bible also prescribes death for adultery. Christians murdered adulterers and "witches" during the middle ages, and don't think Fred Phelps wouldn't do this to LGBTs tomorrow if he thought he could get away with it.

Our society is better than theirs only because we have have a secular constitution and less religious leaders on average.

That also doesn't mean we can't point out how disgusting and cowardly it is to murder a woman for your favorite petulant imaginary father when it is muslims doing it.

and then, in no time it degrades into pontifications that "our society is superior" to theirs. It also provides red meat to the people who believe that we should stay in The Middle East to help those poor backward people "get it right."

Yes, atrocities of all origin should be condemned. However, we also must fully understand that nations such as Somalia do NOT have any semblance of a functioning government. Therefore, if we don't want to send Peace Keeping Forces over there to enforce the rule of law, it's hardly justified to pontificate our superiority.