Cyprus-Forum.com

[Moonlight]

Like which variables Shahmaran? the rape is rape and the murder is murder . The punishment should be strict so the others will get lesson from that.

[QAMERSLAND]

Bucksboy,
Trouble is you've just committed some basic logical fallacy.

Some Muslims planted bombs
All the London bombers were Muslim,
Therefore all Muslims are bombers.

Some Islamists place bombs
All the London bombers were Islamist
Therefore Islam is a religion of bombers

Or other syllogistic fallacies. Whichever way, whichever variant, its bollocks.

I'd say that no one kills or bombs ]because they are a Muslim or a Christian or whatever else. It is the religion or whatever else which ostensibly provides them with a language of justification for their actions.

Below is a poem/lyric by Cherryl Wheeler that was used in the light of the Columbine High School killings (I think). Sometime you don't have to go into some highly complex reasoning and theology to explain why some guys can kill and bomb :

Maybe it's the movies, maybe it's the books
Maybe it's the bullets, maybe it's the real crooks
Maybe it's the drugs, maybe it's the parents
Maybe it's the colors everybody's wearin
Maybe it's the President, maybe it's the last one
Maybe it's the one before that, what he done
Maybe it's the high schools, maybe it's the teachers
Maybe it's the tattooed children in the bleachers
Maybe it's the Bible, maybe it's the lack
Maybe it's the music, maybe it's the crack
Maybe it's the hairdos, maybe it's the TV
Maybe it's the cigarettes, maybe it's the family
Maybe it's the fast food, maybe it's the news
Maybe it's divorce, maybe it's abuse
Maybe it's the lawyers, maybe it's the prisons
Maybe it's the Senators, maybe it's the system
Maybe it's the fathers, maybe it's the sons
Maybe it's the sisters, maybe it's the moms
Maybe it's the radio, maybe it's road rage
Maybe El Nino, or UV rays
Maybe it's the army, maybe it's the liquor
Maybe it's the papers, maybe the militia
Maybe it's the athletes, maybe it's the ads
Maybe it's the sports fans, maybe it's a fad
Maybe it's the magazines, maybe it's the internet
Maybe it's the lottery, maybe it's the immigrants
Maybe it's taxes, big business
Maybe it's the KKK and the skinheads
Maybe it's the communists, maybe it's the Catholics
Maybe it's the hippies, maybe it's the addicts
Maybe it's the art, maybe it's the sex
Maybe it's the homeless, maybe it's the banks
Maybe it's the clearcut, maybe it's the ozone
Maybe it's the chemicals, maybe it's the car phones
Maybe it's the fertilizer, maybe it's the nose rings
Maybe it's the end, but I know one thing.
If it were up to me, I'd take away the guns.

[url]http://capecodhistory.us/quotes/verse.html[/url

Dead right.
Islam IS a religion of bombers.

Islam is the religion of Peace but it teaches to fight against Oppression and injustice

Example: when USA and allies go and kill innocent people in Afghanistan, Iraq and support (weapons, Money, political) Israel to kill in Palestine. The Muslims who loss their close relatives or who feel their pain and suffering retaliat against.

But Islam does not justify killing of innocent people for any reason. Whether it is done by Muslims or non Muslims, Islam condemns the killing of innocent people in USA, UK and also condemns the killing done by USA, UK and allies done in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine

The Blaim of Bomb Blasts in USA and UK are not proved yet that they were realy done by Muslims and the muslims are still Prime suspects.

For sake of argument, even if there are few muslims who are involved in boombing, you can not blaim Islam for it. same as if Hitler killed 6 millions jews, i will naver blaim christianity for that because i know christianity also dont teaches to kill innocent same as Islam dont teaches to kill innocent people.

[QAMERSLAND]

Like which variables Shahmaran? the rape is rape and the murder is murder . The punishment should be strict so the others will get lesson from that.

Very well said, if we suffer ourselves, we want the strict punishment but if some other is suffering, we remember human rights.

I want to ask you if your mother or your sister or your daughter is raped or killed in front of your eyes. What will you do?

Will you let the culprit to go free?

Islam suggests the Death Penalty or forgiveness by the victims only.

God knows the Best

[QAMERSLAND]

I seem to have hit the nail on the head with 23:6. I have found the following detailed account by a woman from the Philippines who went to Saudi Arabia to work as a housemaid and suffered unspeakable ill treatment, including repeated rape. The interesting thing is that her employer was an imam (!) and he actually quoted 23:3 of the Quran to justify his acts.

This is the relevant extract of this woman's story:

http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index. ... e&pageid=2



So, QAMERSLAND or rajput 49, you want to tell us of the delights of islam. Why have you both suddenly gone quiet when I ask you to comment on this matter. I need some guidance about Islam. Does 23:6 of the Quran permit an employer to rape his housemaid? What do you think about this?

Sorry for late response .

Thank you for asking about My religion and it is my duty to tell you the truth according to the best of my knowledge. God knows the best.

It is totally forbidden in Islam to Rape any women and the punishment of the Rape is Death penalty.

As I read the statement of the victim, as she explained that her employer took her photographs to blackmail her and asked her not to tell any one clearly shows that his that act was not correct and he was afraid anyone to know about it. If it were justify by the Religion than why did he tried to blackmail her not tell anyone. In fact it looks like the individual act of Employer.

if it were justfy by the religion than employer should have not asked the victim to keep it secret. In fact he wanted to keep it secret because it was not the right act morraly and religiouly according to Islam.

About the Quranic verse 23-6. It allows the master to have sexual relationship with wife and salve but it does not mean that some one has right to rape. You should also read the context and the time when this verse was revealed to understand the reason why it was allowed?
Islam allows men to have up to 4 wives but the same time it is the only religious scripture on face the earth which has statement “ It is better you marry only one” . To marry more than one has a lot of conditions that one must fulfill.
No other religious scripture including Bible put any limit. It is the church who decided Christians to marry only one. Who is superior? God’s words or Church?

I hope answer the question

[CopperLine]

If the meaning of slave is a property of an owner, then what rights do slave women have against rape ? (Indeed the notion of rape - as non-consensual, forced sex - as a criminal act is lost if one party is simply property and not a legal person).

So Qamersland, when you write 'About the Quranic verse 23-6. It allows the master to have sexual relationship with wife and salve but it does not mean that some one has right to rape,' it leaves a huge gap in the protection of rape victims. It might be against Islam or the law to rape a woman, but if the woman in question is considered as property of a man (slave or wife- a meaning which has been very common in many legal traditions, Christian as well as Muslim) then non-consensual sex is not a rape. (That the man in the story was ashamed might have nothing to do with whether it was illegal). Historically speaking it was only through the securing by women of formal legal equality with men that this (absurd) argument about women-as-property was ended and the criminalisation of rape achieved. The problem with a number of legal systems still claiming to be based in Islam - the Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states come to mind, but also Iran, Pakistan - is that they continue with the formal legal inequality of men and women.

Not until formal legal equality is achieved in these countries will the massive crimes of rape have any chance of being ended. It is simply not good enough for Muslims (or any others) to say words to the effect of 'our religion holds women in high regard, and we are opposed to their bad treatment, and our religion prohibits XYZ. And you have to respect our religious difference' - for, so long as differential formal status is promoted between women and men so different actual treatment will continue.

[Tim Drayton]

Qamersland,

Thank you for your reply.

So, you are abandoining your position of total denial and accept that housemaids from South Asian countires are raped by their Gulf Arab employers. Good. You now realise that I have first-hand knowledge of life in that part of the world based on residence in Qatar, so you have abandoned your claims that I am spreading lies. You should also realise that I mixed a great deal with workers from South Asia and particularly Sri Lankan during my stay there. So much so that I can speak basic Sinhalese. I have seen and heard a great deal that goes on there.

By coincidence, I was waiting for a bus into the town centre this morning and a Sri Lankan maid walked past, and I suprised her by calling out "Suba udasanek" which means "good morning" in Sinhalese. After being taken back by surprise, she replied in her own language. At that point the thought occured to me that here, at least, was one Sri Lankan women who was able to work in a civilised country and be spared the kind of treatment she would receive if she was working as a maid in the Gulf. At that point I literally had to fight to keep my tears back.

Another charming little incident from Qatar sudenly comes to mind, so perhaps I can jot it down here. One of the children of a Gulf Arab threw a pan of red hot fat into the face of an Indonesian maid, causing her serious injury and permanent mutilation. Why did the child do this? For a laugh. Interesting - does the Quran also permit acts of mutilation to be conducted on somebody classed as a "right-hand possession". Maybe this is so - because at least under Sharia law as it is practised in Qatar no Gulf Arab is ever punished for acts of this kind. Shall I investigate this and let you know if I come up with anything? While I am at it I could also list the lewd sexual acts which are canonically permitted with a "right-hand possession" but not with one's wife.

I know very well how South Asians are treated in this part of the world, and it doesn't seem to make any difference whether they are fellow Muslims or not. The fact is that acts which in any civilised country with a penal code would constitute serious offences such as murder, rape, mutilation, kidnapping or forced labour are committed with impunity by Gulf Arabs, particularly but not only against South Asians, with total impunity.

Here is the point. You now try to paint such acts as individual transgressions. However, my argument is that it is Sharia law as practiced in this part of the world that condones such actions.

Even if we are to argue, from within the premises of Sharia law, that a master is entitled according to 26:3 of the Quran to have non-consensual sex with his housemaid because she is a "right-hand possession", then if this sexual activity is therefore canonically lawful and verse 6 specifically states:

6. Except with those joined to them in the marriage bond, or (the captives) whom their right hands possess,- for (in their case) they are free from blame,

why are foreign housemaids who become pregnant routinely imprisoned in Saudi Arabia if they become pregnant, even though the above verse which you consider to be the very words of God tell us that the women in question is "free from blame"?

The question that is incumbent on you as somebody who wishes us to adopt Islam and thus live under Sharia law is to tell us whether you believe such practices to be acceptable under Sharia law. In other words, is this the way of life you wish to invite us to adopt? Because I for one say that if this is Sharia law it offends every sense of moral decency that I have and you can take your Sharia law and go away and leave me in peace (to express my sentiment politiely). And as I have just shown, the practice of imprisoning maids who are victims of rape cannot even be condoned under Sharia law. So just what are they practising in the Arabian Peninsula?

If, on the other hand, you are prepared to say that Sharia law and thus Islam as it is currently practised in the Arabian Peninsula is a corruption of true Islam and you are prepared to condemn such practices as barbaric, then I have some respect for you. However, it is then incumbent on you to explain why you do not try to put Islam's own house in order before trying to tout it to Westerners. I will repeat an earlier question: Why did we see an outpouring of rage among Islamic activists when a few cartoons were published in a Danish newspaper, yet not a word of critcisim let alone outrage is ever heard from the same activists against barbaric acts committed in countries that claim to be home to the most pious Muslims on earth, that were the very cradle of Islam and are home to the most sacred shrines in Islam. Why do we see mobs burning Danish flags but not the flag of the House of Saud that has usurped this faith to set themselves up as absolute rulers of their desert kingdom?

By the way, I would be interested to hear some input from our good friend rajput49. His name leads me to suggest that he is a South Asian Muslim. Perhaps he would care to comment as to whether my account of the treatment received by South Asian workers in the Gulf states is correct. Actually, I gained a very positive impression of Indians in Qatar. These are the people who literally run all of the business and commerce in this country. Qatar would literally fall apart without them. One thing I notice is that Indian Muslims are gradually exerting a civilising influence over the Gulf Arabs. Ask a Qatari what their country's national dish is and there is a good chance they will reply "biriyani", and they look very puzzled when you tell them that this is an Indian dish. The young generation of Qataris has been brought up by Indian maids on Indian food. It is odd indeed to hear young Qataris give instructions to their servants in Hindi, but this is far from uncommon because they have learned the language of the people who have actually brought them up. And along with their language, they are becoming instilled with some of the values of South Asia. Much more civilised values they are. For the truth is that when rajput49's forefather's converted to Islam they already belonged to one of the oldest and richest civilisations on earth.

[shahmaran]

Well if you think animalistic actions such as rape and murder should be counter treated with more animalistic actions likes mutilation or execution then you are basically showing that under certain circumstances it is acceptable to kill people. If someone did something similar to my loved ones, yes i would probably kill him if given to chance but that is not the point, the reason we have laws and courts is so personal emotions or beliefs do not decide on the level of punishment one will get -as this would vary from person to person or from belief to belief- so there needs to be another body that can have an emotionless and objective look on the matter, that would serve one universal truth about human ethics.

The severity of punishments have gotten more and more humane over the course of history, from the days where people used to get beheaded for very minor crime we have gradually come to the days where execution has been totally banned from certain places, so i think, during these times, still executing and mutilating people for certain crimes is very ancient, barbaric and ignorant. It shows no scientific explanation nor any will to find out what the underlying reason for a man to rape a child or why would a person resort to serial murder, we need to work on it so that people can avoid it in the future.

There is a reason for everything in this universe and until we find out, simply executing people is just too easy, almost like sweeping the troubles under the carpet.

Of course if you are a religious man, all this would probably fly over your head, but at least you can appreciate that there are many kinds of belief in this world and all require different understandings and appreciations.

[CopperLine]

Tim Drayton and Shahmaran are spot on.

First,

Here is the point. You now try to paint such acts as individual transgressions. However, my argument is that it is Sharia law as practiced in this part of the world that condones such actions.

It is the basis of law that is the fundamental problem, not individual transgressions of what, in these cases being discussed, has been transformed into a moral transgression (feeling of shame, or dishonour), not a legal prohibition.

To put it differently it is not that there are more or less bad people in Islam or Christiantity or any other system of belief, it is whether the laws are constituted to treat certain acts in an equal and consistent manner. Sharia, because of the fundamental differential treatment of men and women has led to bad law and appaling abuses (at least in this particular area, i.e, the law that discriminates against 50% of the population).

Second, following Shahmaran, the whole point of a legal system and an independent legislature and judiciary is to remove the resolution of disputes and the prosecution of crimes from indvidual and private purpose, including vengeance. In English and other common law traditions, for example, the crime of murder is understood not just as a crime against an indvidual (the murder victim) but a crime against society. As a result it is the society in question, through the legal system, that the quality of guilt and the nature of any punishment is to be determined.

The rise of 'the victims' rights movement' - where the victims of crime get a greater say in what the punishment should be ---- provoked in the UK by the gutter press such as the Daily Mail, Sun, NoW, and Express - is a dangerous retrogressive step. (Of courese those newspapers don't publish apologies when they provoke baseless witchhunts, nor do they champion victims' rights when they themselves are involved in fraud, deception, lying etc) The irony is that personalising 'justice' is exactly the kind of feudal attitude to law which is tearing Pakistan apart.

[rajput49]

southener now u got what u were looking for?from day one we are trying to make point that u shouldnt judge islam by the actions of few muslims.now what it comes to ur side that attacking afghanistan or iraq u say its not by christianity.so acts of some muslims acting against islam how u can justify commenting on islam as whole.same applies to the """"'story""""" for house maids how u can blame islam for such a crime.
as far as the verse """""mentioned and discussed"""The problem with the verse is that many translators and interpreters have wrongly assumed that the phrase, “Malakatu Aimanukum”, stand for “What your right hands possess” or slave girls. Actually the phrase stands for: “What your right hands have pledged or married”. As for example, Ayesha’s self-identification as a wife of the Prophet of Allah in Arabic was: “Malakani Rasul Allah” (The Prophet of Allah married me). One may get further clarifications from the following verse: “… And to those you have given your pledge in marriage give their share, for God is witness to everything” [ Surah Nissa, revealed in Medina, 4:33]. Here the expression “ Malakatu Aimanakum”, stands for “marriage”.
“ Also forbidden are married women unless they are captives (of war), such is the decree of God. Lawful for you are women besides them if you seek them with your wealth for wedlock and not for debauchery.” [4:24]
Muslims just cannot have sex with POWs or slaves without marrying them first.
what bible says u must look
Deuteronomy 20: 10-14:
When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.
Exodus 21:7-11
When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment.
The verses are pretty self explanatory. This is a legalized sex slave industry found in the Bible. So we know have legalized rape, and legalize sex slaves.

[QAMERSLAND]

Well if you think animalistic actions such as rape and murder should be counter treated with more animalistic actions likes mutilation or execution then you are basically showing that under certain circumstances it is acceptable to kill people. If someone did something similar to my loved ones, yes i would probably kill him if given to chance but that is not the point, the reason we have laws and courts is so personal emotions or beliefs do not decide on the level of punishment one will get -as this would vary from person to person or from belief to belief- so there needs to be another body that can have an emotionless and objective look on the matter, that would serve one universal truth about human ethics.

The severity of punishments have gotten more and more humane over the course of history, from the days where people used to get beheaded for very minor crime we have gradually come to the days where execution has been totally banned from certain places, so i think, during these times, still executing and mutilating people for certain crimes is very ancient, barbaric and ignorant. It shows no scientific explanation nor any will to find out what the underlying reason for a man to rape a child or why would a person resort to serial murder, we need to work on it so that people can avoid it in the future.

There is a reason for everything in this universe and until we find out, simply executing people is just too easy, almost like sweeping the troubles under the carpet.

Of course if you are a religious man, all this would probably fly over your head, but at least you can appreciate that there are many kinds of belief in this world and all require different understandings and appreciations.

there are Islamic courts who decide the punishment if it is proved.
death penalty is not the punishment for minor crimes, it is the punishment of crimes like killing and rape etc

Islam is the most misunderstood religion in the world and misunderstanding is due to propaganda against Islam. anyone wants fame in this world, very easy, just write against Islam whether it is true or lie. you will be projected in the western media to malign Islam