Who said a raped 14 years old girl must be stoned?
Okay, cheating on your wife is improper, is immoral and is not accepted. I'm fine with this. But honestly, does stoning serve such a guilt rightfully? Would you treat married men and women who've had affairs outside the course of their marriage in the way you treat a war criminal for example? What about rapists? Killers? Hell even the killers and rapists are not being stoned in an Islamic system as you believe in. Why this ugly brutal looking way of punishment for such a guilt? It's an Islamic order but I insist on it not being an ISLAM order.
Where's your brain gone Yamen? Only a sick animal would be able to stand and watch a man or woman being brutally stoned. I can't believe you're with this kind of punishment.
You know that for getting married, a couple have to go through some traditional and legal stuff in order to officialize their marriage. In Iran, a cleric comes and reads a verse of Qoran, asks the girl is she's really gonna take the boy as her husband. He asks the same question from the boy. Some signatures, some documents and the two are now married. I give you two cases, I hope you'll read it unbiasedly and tell me the difference.
A) After living a couple of years with his wife, the man falls for another woman. Since he's allowed to have two wives at the same time, he's going through all the stuff I mentioned above and by that, he does officialize his marriage with the second woman. He provides a separate house for his second wife, he spends some days with the first and some with the second woman.
B) After living a couple of years with his wife, the man bumps into another woman, falls for her and spends a night with her without planning to see the woman any more time.
First wife of the A-man will know about his husband's second wife anyway. She'll know that his husband is spending some nights of week in the second wife's house, probably going to have kids from her and she's also aware of the second woman and her kids being involved in her husband's properties after his death.
The B-man's wife might never know about the one-night affair of her husband. But let's say she'll know about it one day.
In both case, the women will be offended for sure. they'll both feel being betrayed. In the first case however, the woman will have to accept another woman to share everything with her forever. Whether you like it or not, whether you believe it or not, many women would overlook a one-night mistake of their husbands but they never accept to share everything they've got with another woman for rest of their lives.
The A-man has done something in course of his marriage. Islamic rules won't prevent him to marry another woman. His wife has to accept her husband's second wife without any right to object. The B-man will get stoned on the other hand. The difference between the A-man and the B-man (at least in Iran), is a cleric, a verse of Qoran and some signatures.
Islam doesn't order stoning. I once posted some verses of Qoran in the stoning thread and you told me "who the fuck does care if Qoran orders it or not". I do care about it. This is not Islam. It's the retarded belief of some retards in retarded societies. Whether it's Islam which has made those people be retarded or not is another point but stoning is not an Islam order for sure.
Yes.
Aaah, now I'm relieved
I can't believe these much of men and women being stoned have all been that stupid to let 4 people witness them having sex.
Now, let's say it's the rule:
When a married man/woman commit an illicit affair outside the course of marriage, the man/woman must get stoned IF the affair is being proven by 4 eye-witnesses, .
For me, the possibility of an illicit affair being witnessed by four people is almost zero. So what's the point of such rule? Isn't it making fun of us? That rule is pointless, funny and absurd and this is why the IF clause of it has been forgotten throughout the time.
In your proper system, a married man/woman who has had committed adultery is getting stoned, right? It hurts the image of humanity to say the least.
Yes, he doesn't understand how it goes here because what's going here in my country and yours is abnormal, stupid and disgraceful.
He questions something he can't understand. If you understand what Seven can't understand, why don't you help him (and me and many others) to understand? If he's wrong, why don't you help him to get it right? Once Martin asked something about religion iiric and you jokingly accused him of "thinking too much". Now this. With these ignorant ways of discussing, all one might think is that you do not know the answer yourself but you just follow some instructions you've been told since your childhood without even thinking about them.
It is not.
So are you worried only about your family members Ahmed?
Arabs of pre-Islam were also quite fine with burying their daughters alive. Why did Mohammad fight with them?
Seven is free to have pre-marital sex and you can't tell him not to have it. You are also free to hold out on pre-marital sex and Seven can't tell you to have it. But when this "not having pre-marital sex" is becoming a comprehensive rule in a society, I'm not fine with it. I might live in your neighborhood but with completely different opinions from yours. I might want to have pre-marital sex and brag about it on a tv show. If you don't like it, okay, turn off your tv and stick to your opinions.
But this is exactly the point. We've got cars, computers, internet, technology, education, etc but we stone people. These two don't fit each other.
But in Belgium, when people find some rule retarded they are able to object it, to try to CHANGE it, to replace it with a not-retarded rule. But can we do it when we find an Islamic rule not suitable for our current society?
Buy on AliExpress.com
Holy shit. i've never seen this one before.
