Man ordered to be blinded with acid - sharia does it again (1 Viewer)

[Trefoil]

Was there no dp for murder then?

Apparently they couldn't make up their mind so they legalised and abolished it a bunch of times.

 

[Iron]

Well that's what you get from a culture derived from vodka and ice

 

[supercalamari]

Interestingly sympathetic to the female victim though. Who'd have thought that an Iranian woman's eyes could be deemed legally equivalent to an Iranian mans! What progress they are making!

Agreed, surely they would instead stone the woman for daring to complain about the attack.

 

[sam04u]

Iran has a pretty bad human rights record.
But, to suggest that this had anything to do with Sharia is an insult to common sense, and shows that absolute lack of understanding which exists in the west about Islam, and the Islamic form of government and law.

Sharia (Arabic for law, usually used in cojunction with Islamic law) is the law which is supposed to govern an Islamic state. The problem being, an Islamic state does not exist. So therefore this is not an example of Sharia, as it's impossible to implement Sharia, because Sharia can only exist in an Islamic state, of which there is none.

 

[Iron]

And how would YOU define an Islamic state? Is it a standard higher than an overwhelming majority of the population following Islam?

 

[Trefoil]

Iran has a pretty bad human rights record.
But, to suggest that this had anything to do with Sharia is an insult to common sense, and shows that absolute lack of understanding which exists in the west about Islam, and the Islamic form of government and law.

Sharia (Arabic for law, usually used in cojunction with Islamic law) is the law which is supposed to govern an Islamic state. The problem being, an Islamic state does not exist. So therefore this is not an example of Sharia, as it's impossible to implement Sharia, because Sharia can only exist in an Islamic state, of which there is none.

I hear that about 'true' communism and 'true' libertarianism, as well.

How about instead of these 'true' unrealistic, idealised systems, we opt for something concrete, pragmatic, and stable? Such as, oh I dunno... social democracy?

Anyway, 'true' Sharia law is every bit as vengeful of this eye for an eye business in Iran, sam.

 

[cookie.banana]

people are mean and stupid

 

[nottu]

Iran has a pretty bad human rights record.
But, to suggest that this had anything to do with Sharia is an insult to common sense, and shows that absolute lack of understanding which exists in the west about Islam, and the Islamic form of government and law.

Sharia (Arabic for law, usually used in cojunction with Islamic law) is the law which is supposed to govern an Islamic state. The problem being, an Islamic state does not exist. So therefore this is not an example of Sharia, as it's impossible to implement Sharia, because Sharia can only exist in an Islamic state, of which there is none.

Well that's just getting nitpicky.

 

[youngminii]

He deserves it.
You know what I reckon? Australia should follow the example
Well, not as radically, but up the punishment system

 

[hpdanemma]

He deserves it.
You know what I reckon? Australia should follow the example
Well, not as radically, but up the punishment system

LOL at your sig!!!

 

[youngminii]

LOL at your sig!!!

Why thank you, isn't it cool? He should be Goku in the movie, not Justin Chatwin

 

[omgd.]

Why thank you, isn't it cool? He should be Goku in the movie, not Justin Chatwin

theres a DBZ movie ? :O

 

[sam04u]

And how would YOU define an Islamic state? Is it a standard higher than an overwhelming majority of the population following Islam?

I hear that about 'true' communism and 'true' libertarianism, as well.

The caliphate is the only form of governance that has full approval in traditional Islamic theology, and "is the core political concept of Sunni Islam, by the consensus of the Muslim majority in the early centuries.

How about instead of these 'true' unrealistic, idealised systems, we opt for something concrete, pragmatic, and stable? Such as, oh I dunno... social democracy?

Yeah, that works for me. I've said that many times. It's a system which works best.

 

[xeuyrawp]

But, to suggest that this had anything to do with Sharia is an insult to common sense.

So would you suggest that countries which practice sharia law (or are indeed just Islamic) don't have worse human rights violations?

 

[cutemouse]

Ugh... There is a saying - "Two wrongs don't make a right"... [although "three rights make a left" ]

 

[sam04u]

So would you suggest that countries which practice sharia law (or are indeed just Islamic) don't have worse human rights violations?

You're trolling right?

In everything you said you are completely wrong. Firstly no country currently practices sharia (or sharia law) as sharia law can only be implemented in an Islamic state. Secondly you imply that various countries can practice sharia, that is also highly incorrect as there can only be one Islamic state, and therefore sharia can only ever be implemented in one state. Currently no such state exists (for better or for worse). Which leads to your next point of "countries" which are Islamic. That is also highly flawed as there can only be one Islamic state under the Caliphate form of government which intends to unify the ummah, or joint muslim peoples.

So that is to say we have no way of knowing unless we go back in time, and try to roughly figure where such a state would be in today's standards in terms of human rights. Considering the Caliphates of the past (generally) had human rights (a new concept) which were ahead of the rest of the world at the time. It is safe to assume that it would be atleast equal if not better than todays human rights standards of countries with Islamic majorities, and probably even various western countries.

 

[sam04u]

I'll proffer a suggestion; the concept of theocracy is untenable in a post-enlightenment world; discuss?

Religious persecution is a pretty shit thing.
So too are holy wars.

 

[bigboyjames]

ROFLMAO

thats what fucking happens when you have religious doctrine used as a guidance for your social policies.

 

[xeuyrawp]

You're trolling right?

No?

In everything you said you are completely wrong.

Erm... I actually didn't say anything, Sam, I was asking you a question. Notice the question mark and all...?

 

[nottu]

Sam why getting all technical?

Iran = islamic state because the government is run by muslims
sharia law in Iran = you get killed for being a faggot.