100 lashes for having affair with divorcee - Page 2

papa smurf · 21-11-2009, 11:26

[QUOTE=zing;34912887]well I think you can look at it from a morality point of view. Like Islam or not they hold moral behavior very highly and their laws are very strong against breaches. Look at how they treat a thief etc .

We in this country have a very lax view of morality but I find that distasteful myself.

She must have known the laws but still broke them. The guy who had not been married got off lighter.

If you think about marrage vows taken in churches in this country . Both partners swear in front of almighty God to be true. Ok I realise in reg offices the vows are different but a contract is still made. Both hold no water in law. For someone to breach a contract with God in a country where it is held held in the highest order is asking for it. Not that I agree with it[COLOR="Silver"]

i'm an atheist there is no one to swear in front of.

Kymmy · 21-11-2009, 11:28

I agree that laws should be upheld, but what's strange here is that this woman was allowed a divorce and then held and punished under a law that states she wasn't divorced.. Surely any law that allows that is flawed to the extreme??

21-11-2009, 11:37

[QUOTE=papa smurf;34912889]

Quote:

Originally Posted by zing

well I think you can look at it from a morality point of view. Like Islam or not they hold moral behavior very highly and their laws are very strong against breaches. Look at how they treat a thief etc .

We in this country have a very lax view of morality but I find that distasteful myself.

She must have known the laws but still broke them. The guy who had not been married got off lighter.

If you think about marrage vows taken in churches in this country . Both partners swear in front of almighty God to be true. Ok I realise in reg offices the vows are different but a contract is still made. Both hold no water in law. For someone to breach a contract with God in a country where it is held held in the highest order is asking for it. Not that I agree with it

i'm an atheist there is no one to swear in front of.

[COLOR="Silver"]then you wouldnt be getting married in a church then would you? in your opinion there is no one to swear in front of but those who do believe and do get married in a church are making a big promise

---------- Post added at 10:37 ---------- Previous post was at 10:36 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kymmy

I agree that laws should be upheld, but what's strange here is that this woman was allowed a divorce and then held and punished under a law that states she wasn't divorced.. Surely any law that allows that is flawed to the extreme??

perhaps she was divorced somewhere else? perhaps a different province

she could have still kept your pants on though kymmy she must have known the law

Russ · 21-11-2009, 11:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by papa smurf

because the laws of Islam where written by men for men.

No, it's just interpreted that way. After all I'm assuming you've done some research on islam?

In any case it's amazing how some people advocate thieves getting a hand chopped off, or rapists/murderers getting executed, yet this is considered 'barbaric' and 'medieval'. You are either in favour of capital punishment or not at all, armchair experts.

Kymmy · 21-11-2009, 11:40

A divorce can only be granted in the country where one gets married.. SO what you;re telling me is that one part of the country will see the divorce and another side won't and might put her to death because of it??

That my dear is one seriosly (insert whatever word you think is best here) country

papa smurf · 21-11-2009, 11:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ

No, it's just interpreted that way. After all I'm assuming you've done some research on islam?

In any case it's amazing how some people advocate thieves getting a hand chopped off, or rapists/murderers getting executed, yet this is considered 'barbaric' and 'medieval'. You are either in favour of capital punishment or not at all, armchair experts.

who wrote it then -and if you say god i'm going to fall off my seat laughing.

Russ · 21-11-2009, 11:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by papa smurf

who wrote it then -and if you say god i'm going to fall off my seat laughing.

I'll be happy to educate you when the topic comes up.

21-11-2009, 11:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kymmy

A divorce can only be granted in the country where one gets married.. SO what you;re telling me is that one part of the country will see the divorce and another side won't and might put her to death because of it??

That my dear is one seriosly (insert whatever word you think is best here) country

Only supposing. Look at Iraq now. There are still 3 different factions in different areas of the country each may interpret the law differently. Better example is the USA. Some states will put you to death for murder where others wont. Some states have totally different laws than others. Look at the UK Scotland has different laws than England in part. No different really ( only obviously a little less harsh lol)

papa smurf · 21-11-2009, 11:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ

I'll be happy to educate you when the topic comes up.

it has i'm all ears --impress me

Russ · 21-11-2009, 11:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by papa smurf

it has i'm all ears --impress me

This thread isn't about who wrote any ancient texts - as I said when that topic comes up I'll be happy to educate you. Or of course you could just look it up yourself, perish the thought....

Kymmy · 21-11-2009, 11:52

States is irrelevant as you're talking about the sentancing there.. Murder is still murder wherever you are in the states and divorce is still divorce..

The worrying issue in this case is that someone has issued a divorce to this woman and that means she's happy to go have sex with an unmarried man (might be frowned upon but that's her business) Then all of a sudden she's sentanced to death for the same action in another part of the country. How can that be justified?? It should be one or the other.. The sooner Somalia gets a goverment (or invading army) in position the better it'll be

papa smurf · 21-11-2009, 11:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ

This thread isn't about who wrote any ancient texts - as I said when that topic comes up I'll be happy to educate you. Or of course you could just look it up yourself, perish the thought....

i'll wait till you gather enough info for your full armchair expert sermon

Kymmy · 21-11-2009, 11:57

If you two are finished with the "I'm gonna get the last word in game" can we get back on topic from now on (and no I'm not expecting or needing a reply

)

Gary L · 21-11-2009, 12:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russ

In any case it's amazing how some people advocate thieves getting a hand chopped off, or rapists/murderers getting executed, yet this is considered 'barbaric' and 'medieval'. You are either in favour of capital punishment or not at all, armchair experts.

Stoning somebody to death is barbaric and medieval. whether you're in favour of capital punishment or not.

21-11-2009, 12:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kymmy

States is irrelevant as you're talking about the sentancing there.. Murder is still murder wherever you are in the states and divorce is still divorce..

The worrying issue in this case is that someone has issued a divorce to this woman and that means she's happy to go have sex with an unmarried man (might be frowned upon but that's her business) Then all of a sudden she's sentanced to death for the same action in another part of the country. How can that be justified?? It should be one or the other.. The sooner Somalia gets a goverment (or invading army) in position the better it'll be

Its only irrelevant to you as it backs up your argument. Its relevant to me as it backs up mine and shows that in "civilised" societies there is differences in aspects of the law. Somalia do not need to justify it as its their law its not our place to force democracy and our laws and beliefs on the world. That I think would make us dictators and fascists to say the least.