Muslims upset at in-your-face lesson in Dutchness

did the lovers not hear of divorce? :rolleyes: and then marrying?
 
Then immagine that happening to your child- because they experiment with another of the same sex- which is quite common, or your mother because she was brought up to be a muslim, never having the chance to se anything from another relogion, and when she does, whe decides that she believes in the new religion. Oh, but there is no compulsion in religion- just get killed if you follow another!
 
never heard of muslim men, particularly from harsh arab countries threatening their wives with death if they leave? NO?, I have seen it here, I even had to help a girl of 17 escape a violent marriage to a man who was "arranged" for her and used to rape her anally and threatened her with death if he found her.
 
Oh, and I suppose a divorce piece of paper is worth all that torture and agony? Now try and tell me, its not torture and its not hateful?
 
irsha said:
two lovers are found making love- they are married, but in a violent and loveless marriage, in a moment of consoling each other they fal in love, they are caught making love,
Click to expand...


Why don't they just get a divorce (from their previous marriage) and marry each other? At-least that way, they won't be doing anything sinful will they?

At the same time, obviously islam allows divorce if the marriage isn't going well. Especially if the partners aren't being fair to each other [i.e. abuse in the home.]


When they make love outside of marriage, if the person has a child - who's going to earn for that child? who's going to support it? Do you really think that the love is so strong that the couple will support each other all their life? What will happen if the womans previous husband finds out, don't you think there will be more violence?

Rarely does a marriage that has sexual relations out of wedlock be successful, because anyone can leave the other person whenever they will. That love doesn't last forever, and it will die out. Who will support the woman, and the child then?
 
you too? The hijab actually even say the words H-A-T-E on them, cant you read? scroll down the avatar
 
And to add to Fi_Sabillillah's post, as Tina Turner said: 'What's love got to do with it?'

:p

Edit: Irsha, I've looked at the avatar, and I still don't see the word 'hate'. Unless it's in Arabic or something.
 
I suppose that poor 17 ear old girl deserves to get stoned to death if she dares to make love to another person, she knows for a fact the man will kill her if he found her, and she must be find-able to get a divorce! How can you excuse such barbarism, there are plenty of people waiting to adopt, they can also get pensions for single mums.
 
Muezzin said:
And to add to Fi_Sabillillah's post, as Tina Turner said: 'What's love got to do with it?'

:p

Edit: Irsha, I've looked at the avatar, and I still don't see the word 'hate'. Unless it's in Arabic or something.
Click to expand...

Nothing, that exactly my point- what HAS love got ot do with it? Your God doesn't love, he hates, he wants people to be tortured to death for what is a minor "crime: in the rest of the civilised world
 
irsha said:
Nothing, that exactly my point- what HAS love got ot do with it? Your God doesn't love, he hates, he wants people to be tortured to death for what is a minor "crime: in the rest of the civilised world
Click to expand...

Salaam

Now there was need to insult your lord is there.
 
Ragarding punishments, Irsha I suggest you read this. It is long but would give you a better understanding. Also pay attention to the conditions that stoning is to take place.

Question:
Assalaamu ‘aleykum,

How can it be that in a case in Nigeria a woman is sentenced to death for adultery? The Qur'an specifies that the punishment with four witnesses for adultery and fornication is a hundred lashes (24:2). It is inconceivable that the Prophet (pbuh) would have either acted against this instruction, which is to flog people who do this sin, or if he ever did sentence someone to death at some point, then this verse must be taken as abrogating that punishment.

I've heard some people say that stoning only applies to married couples committing adultery, but that contradicts the Qur'an, and in the Nigerian case the woman was not even married!

I've also heard that scholars have agreed that this verse was referring to the first part of the punishment and that the guilty should also be stoned (after being flogged). This sounds like applying two punishments! According to the hadith upon which the ruling on stoning the married adulterers is based, when the woman requested not to be stoned, the response by the Prophet implies that they should not have done so.

In the Nigerian case, the woman is clearly appealing against the sentence. If she'd claimed to have been raped, would the charges have to be dropped?

Please explain what is the rationale (if any!) behind such ruling.

Jazakallahu kheyr for your time, wa salaam


Answer:

Thank you sister Safiya for this question.

First of all, I would like to bring to your attention that the authority for Muslims in Islam is not the practice of Muslims and Muslim States. Imam Ali (Allah be pleased with him) once said: ‘We know people by al-haq (the truth) and we do not know al-haq by people.’ This means that we should evaluate people by how strong their adherence and commitment to the true path and that we should not evaluate any path by those who are affiliated with or practice it.

The case you mentioned is only one of many other cases in several areas of the Muslim World, where shar’ia (Islamic law) is practiced primitively, if I may say, and away from the objectives and intentions of shari’a. One can see this clearly in the application of hudud (punishments). Some Muslim communities see hudud only as punishments for criminals; they don't perceive hudud as part of a comprehensive system that works in harmony. This system, which is a way of life, is clearly balanced by justice and aimed toward serving the interest of people.

Linguistically, hudud in Arabic means limits or preventions. Legally, they are limits, which prevent the crime from increasing in society, prevent the criminal from going back to similar crimes, and prevent those who think about the same crime from pursuing it. Hudud in this sense are not merely punishments, on the contrary, they are limits and preventive means placed within a larger framework of justice, related directly to the interests of people to serve the ultimate objectives of the Islamic law.

Secondly, I think it is useful to know that the punishment system in Islam has concerns that Muslims need to be aware of. It concerns that are aimed toward the three dimensions of any crime: the criminal (the one who carried out the act), the society (where the crime took place) and the victim (the one who was subject to the criminal act). These objectives are:
To criminals, punishment is kaffara (purification) and reforming for the re-acceptance into the society.

To society, punishment is a preventive method to save the society from crimes.

To victims, punishment is a mean of retribution.

Also, this system is governed by a few key principles, which are:
Every Muslim is accountable for his/her deeds and for every crime there is a punishment that is enforceable by the Muslim State. This principle makes Muslims believe that it is better for them to get punished in their life than to be punished in the hereafter.


The punishment should be prevented as much as possible. A’isha narrated that the Prophet (pbuh) said:

‘Ward off punishment as much as you can. If you find any way out for a Muslim then set him free. If the Imam makes a mistake in granting forgiveness, it is better for him than that he should commit a mistake in imposing punishment.’

Thus any doubt about the evidence should prevent the punishment.


Punishments were set down to protect and secure the ultimate five elements of people’s interests: al-dharuriyat (necessities). These are: deen (belief), an-Nafis (life), al-‘aqil (intellect), al-mal (wealth) and an-nasil (family and lineage).

In addition, it is important to know that in Islam, punishments applied by the Muslim State should be the last resort in preventing crimes and saving the society. The Muslim State should insure the fulfillments of the citizens’ needs in every aspect of their life. Moreover, practicing al-amru bil ma’ruf wa an-nahiyu ‘an al-munkar (enjoining the good and forbidding the evil) in its proper way comes before the application of punishments.

According to the majority of scholars, in its legal meaning zina is ‘the voluntary sexual intercourse outside of marriage when the male sexual organ is inserted inside the female one, regardless of the number of times.’

The act of zina is committed voluntarily, thus rape is not zina and any sexual act under constraint is not zina as well. Also, there should be no doubt that the two partners are not married to one another; any doubt in this sense makes the act not zina.

Finally, the sexual organ must be inserted inside the female vagina, thus any other intimate act, even if it is haraam (prohibited), does not qualify for any specific fixed physical punishment set out in Islamic law (i.e.hudud).There are about 10 conditions of zina you can refer to in books of fiqh (Islamic law).

Islam considers zina a major sin, an indecent act, and an evil path. Therefore, protecting society from zina is an evident aim of Islam. Since zina is considered a great sin and a detestable social illness, Islam required doubtless proof for convicting an individual of zina and severe punishment for those convicted.

There are three clear means of proving zina:
The person accused of zina (zaani) makes a confession and does not go back on his confession. Once the person retracts his/her confession, they are not punishable because there is no proof of the act.

Four reliable and pious men testify that they witnessed the act and actually saw the male sexual organ inserted into the vagina.

A woman without a husband found to be pregnant.
Scholars agreed on the first two methods of proving zina, but disputed the third one; some scholars rejected the third point as proof.

As for those convicted, punishment may be depending on the case; 100 lashes or stoning. The punishment for unmarried individuals is to be flogged 100 lashes. Allah said in the Quran:
The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication,- flog each of them with a hundred stripes: Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by God, if ye believe in God and the Last Day: and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment.


Surah 24 Verse 2

The punishment for individuals whom are married and commit zina is stoning until death. The Prophet (pbuh) said:

‘The blood of a Muslim who testifies that there is no true god but Allah and that I am Allah’s messenger, does not become permissible except for one of three acts: a married person who commits zina, one soul for another (killed) soul, and a man who abandons his deen (religion) and departs from jamaa’ah (of Muslims).’ (Sahih Muslim)

Also, the sunna recorded that the Prophet (pbuh) punished by stoning a number of people such as Ma’iz ibn Malik and Al-Ghamidiyah. Some scholars said the punishment for a married person accused of zina is both flogging and stoning, but the vast majority of scholars did not accept this and limited the punishment to stoning only.

Ibn Al-Qayim in his book A’lam Al-Muwaqa’in, after thoroughly discussing zina as a major detestable sin and explaining its danger to the society stated: ‘…for the zani (the one who committed zina) there are two conditions:
One, the individual, who is married; that has experienced marriage, understands the Islamic reasons for marriage, and has protected himself from zina and al-had (the punishment) and then commits zina. The punishment for those is more severe, because they have no excuse for committing haraam.

The second condition is when the zani is not married; that does not know what the married individual knows and therefore has an excuse to ease the punishment of zina to flogging rather than stoning.’
Allah knows best.
Wa salaam
 
I am not insulting God, I believe you are by saying he wants these hateful things, The last thing I want to do is insult God, I believe I am defending him.
 
THere can be NO justification for cruel and unusual punishment, so I won't even bother reading that long post.
 
irsha said:
THere can be NO justification for cruel and unusual punishment, so I won't even bother reading that long post.
Click to expand...
Wait a minute... a couple of posts ago you were saying that the woman doesn't get her say, and this is unfair. That's a fair point. One should not be ignorant of all the parties' circumstances when deciding a case.

However, you then don't even bother to read this long post? Surely that goes against the philosophy of hearing both sides of the argument?
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top