Sharia law's fine achievements

This is why human rights ought always to have precedence over religious traditions:

Execution of a Teenage Girl.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

To try and stop this kind of evil is why I have been and always will be, a member of Amnesty.

Idiots.

What a wonderfully enlightened society.

very sad

I hate the world just a little more every day.

This case does seem pretty extreme, granted. I'm certainly not going to defend the mulla-ocracy (though according to some, Iranian society is actually quite enlightened and this is just bad propaganda).

What I will say on this case is

1) it is a tragedy, but why would this girl continue to visit and have a relationship with a man that raped her? Some things in this story just don't add up.

2) the statement "human rights must always trump religious traditions" opens the window on a LOT of nasty things, depending on what we decide to make a human right (a very non-universal, very fluid concept).

The problem as I see it is that 'human rights' tend to be defined in relatively short-term timeframes.... what's fashionable now. Examples of 'human rights' that we no longer accept as so: the right of a husband to beat his wife, the right of a property owner to do as he wished with a slave. I know, in today's vision, these 'human rights' are no such thing, but at the time, I assure you, those who exercised their rights felt every bit as strongly entitled to them as we do with what we consider to be human rights now.

Who's to say what will be a human right in the future? What if we decide that incarceration violates a basic human right (and by decide, I mean what if some oddball judge decides to get his name in the legal books by declaring it to be so, and thus having his name attached to the precedent for posterity).

What's more, what happens when 'human rights' come into conflict with each other? Does a 13 year old girl that actually wants to be with a 35 year old man have to right to make that determination? According to most women's groups, a 13 year old girl SHOULD have the right to sexual determination, though I think they would say any male older than her should be liable for statuatory rape, should she change her mind at a later date.

Where am I going with this rant? Relgious traditions act like a low pass filter on social mores, if you will. It's the one way we have of decreasing the impact time as a variable in the social mores equation.... tradition tends to be relatively stable, especially compared to current social climes.

Don't throw out the baby with the bath water. Address the root problem and limit your solution to that. The root cause of the problem here is not religion or religious traditions. It's a society that values the word of men over women and does not respect life, two things which I believe in word Islam is opposed to. Islam calls for a different role for women, but in no way directly states that women are lesser then men (or so I've been told, I'm sure Faisal or one or Dariush or LeftEye can speak much more informed than I can on this issue). Second, pretty much every person I've heard speak on Islam swears that the culture of death is NOT a part of Islam, it is a perversion of it (much as the Inquisition was a perversion of the teachings of Christ).

Originally Posted by Don Corleone:
1) it is a tragedy, but why would this girl continue to visit and have a relationship with a man that raped her? Some things in this story just don't add up.

Abusive relationships are often confusing to those outside. Power is a strange thing. Do you really think a 13 year old girl exploited by a 51 year old ex-policeman in such a society is likely to have the ability to break the cycle of abuse that easily? I suspect that if this had happened in your back yard, you would be baying for the lynch mob, not blaming the girl.

Originally Posted by Don Corleone:
2) the statement "human rights must always trump religious traditions" opens the window on a LOT of nasty things, depending on what we decide to make a human right (a very non-universal, very fluid concept).

Nonsense. Human rights are exactly a universal concept - see the Universal Declaration of Human Rights . Your own Declaration of Independence contains reference to inalienable human rights which informed the development of the idea of universal rights. Just because some mad mullahs or neo-cons find it convenient to ignore the universality of rights, doesn't mean we shouldn't aspire to such.

Whereas religion is made up of very many competing ideas, from many different cultures, some of which are moral and most of which are about control and fear. And, it should be noted, a remarkable number of the major 'world' religions just love to demonise and oppress women.

Originally Posted by Don Corleone:
2) the statement "human rights must always trump religious traditions" opens the window on a LOT of nasty things, depending on what we decide to make a human right (a very non-universal, very fluid concept).

The problem as I see it is that 'human rights' tend to be defined in relatively short-term timeframes.... what's fashionable now. Examples of 'human rights' that we no longer accept as so: the right of a husband to beat his wife, the right of a property owner to do as he wished with a slave. I know, in today's vision, these 'human rights' are no such thing, but at the time, I assure you, those who exercised their rights felt every bit as strongly entitled to them as we do with what we consider to be human rights now.

Who's to say what will be a human right in the future? What if we decide that incarceration violates a basic human right (and by decide, I mean what if some oddball judge decides to get his name in the legal books by declaring it to be so, and thus having his name attached to the precedent for posterity).

Modern concepts of human rights would often clash with the historical reality behind some of the more anachronistic laws in religions, Islam in particular (since it seeks to describe a lifestyle, not just a philosophy). For instance, polygamy may seem an abomination to people used to the idea of monogamous pairings. When the law was first introduced after a prolonged period of war, allowing rich men to marry multiple wives meant the many widows were provided for. There are numerous other teachings in Islam that were humane at the time, yet seem unbearably barbarous now.

Originally Posted by :
Don't throw out the baby with the bath water. Address the root problem and limit your solution to that. The root cause of the problem here is not religion or religious traditions. It's a society that values the word of men over women and does not respect life, two things which I believe in word Islam is opposed to. Islam calls for a different role for women, but in no way directly states that women are lesser then men (or so I've been told, I'm sure Faisal or one or Dariush or LeftEye can speak much more informed than I can on this issue). Second, pretty much every person I've heard speak on Islam swears that the culture of death is NOT a part of Islam, it is a perversion of it (much as the Inquisition was a perversion of the teachings of Christ).

That's what I understand the roles of the genders in Islam to be, different but not superior or inferior to each other. For instance, women were liable to be chastised by beating for transgressions (probably a remnant of the nomadic life), but early on this punishment was interpreted to mean a token beating, by rods that were little more than pieces of straw. This was for not fulfilling their role within the family. However, as long as they acted out this role, there was a great deal of independence for a woman, such as having her own income (that her husband had no right to, unlike the Christian vow), her own career, her own home and life even. And if her husband transgressed, she could carry out her own range of punishments, including divorcing him without his consent. There is much in Islam that is still wise and workable in the modern world, which is why many people are happy to be Muslims.

However, the current fashion is for an extreme, perverted version of the religion, that can indeed be described as Islamo-fascism, fixing roles and hierarchies for individuals (with the ruling class at the top), making demands of their population and preaching hatred for others. At micro-level moderate Islam can still be seen, and in traditionally cosmopolitan areas like Lebanon and pre-2003 Iraq this could still be seen in the country as a whole, and Ahmadinejad is trying to do the same in Iran, but the socio-religious leaders in many Muslim countries are trying to propagate an overtly patriarchal form of Islam, one which would probably have horrified Muhammad had he seen it.

As I've said elsewhere, love historical Islam, pity about the descendants.

Originally Posted by Don Corleone:

it is a tragedy, but why would this girl continue to visit and have a relationship with a man that raped her? Some things in this story just don't add up.

Really? My guess is that he threatened to kill her. Or turn her over to the authorities (which would equal a death sentence). The word of even a former revolutionary guardsman completely overrules the word of a teenage (lower-class Kurdish) girl in Mullahcourt.

My thoughts mirror DC's, mostly.

Nine, though! The age of consent is NINE!

What we have here is a nation mixed between the 8th and 21st centuries.

It ain't pretty.

Originally Posted by Wigferth Ironwall:
What a wonderfully enlightened society.

They are just standing up for morality. After hijacking the ‘79 revolution, the crowning achievement of God’s very own representatives on Earth, the most excellent Mullahs, has been to reduce Islam to beards and Hijab and enforce it on the masses. Content with living in an illusion of a harmonic Islamic society, and unwilling to acknowledge the poorly hidden side of ruthless compulsion, terror, and murder, they stage mock elections and allow puppet reformists into government. The greatest threat to this glorious institution is loud students and sassy teenage girls. But they can fortunately be hanged. Welcome to the IRI.

Originally Posted by Dâriûsh:
They are just standing up for morality. After hijacking the ‘79 revolution, the crowning achievement of God’s very own representatives on Earth, the most excellent Mullahs, has been to reduce Islam to beards and Hijab and enforce it on the masses. Content with living in an illusion of a harmonic Islamic society, and unwilling to acknowledge the poorly hidden side of ruthless compulsion, terror, and murder, they stage mock elections and allow puppet reformists into government. The greatest threat to this glorious institution is loud students and sassy teenage girls. But they can fortunately be hanged. Welcome to the IRI.

I couldn't agree more, my friend.

Originally Posted by Dâriûsh:
They are just standing up for morality. After hijacking the ‘79 revolution, the crowning achievement of God’s very own representatives on Earth, the most excellent Mullahs, has been to reduce Islam to beards and Hijab and enforce it on the masses. Content with living in an illusion of a harmonic Islamic society, and unwilling to acknowledge the poorly hidden side of ruthless compulsion, terror, and murder, they stage mock elections and allow puppet reformists into government. The greatest threat to this glorious institution is loud students and sassy teenage girls. But they can fortunately be hanged. Welcome to the IRI.

I stand corrected, what a fantasticly enlightened society.

As I understand it the revolution started because the Shah tried to supress the masses and force Western values on Iranians (Or should it really be Persians?)

I understand he actually banned the Hijab. While I applaud his effort to break down chauvanistic traditions burrowed brom the Byzantine Empire I think he probably went about it the wrong way.

The sad thing is that there has been no counter revolution.

Originally Posted by Dâriûsh:
They are just standing up for morality. After hijacking the ‘79 revolution, the crowning achievement of God’s very own representatives on Earth, the most excellent Mullahs, has been to reduce Islam to beards and Hijab and enforce it on the masses. Content with living in an illusion of a harmonic Islamic society, and unwilling to acknowledge the poorly hidden side of ruthless compulsion, terror, and murder, they stage mock elections and allow puppet reformists into government. The greatest threat to this glorious institution is loud students and sassy teenage girls. But they can fortunately be hanged. Welcome to the IRI.

People like you give us hope.

And the rest of the world is just so much better eh.

The rest of the world has laws that make it ok to murder innocent babies en masse.

That's actually much worse than anything that Sharia law does.

The idea behind the original post amounts to "the pot calling the kettle black".

"Disturbed by the death of her mother when she was only four or five years old, and her distraught father's subsequent drug addiction, Atefah had a difficult childhood.

She was also left to care for her elderly grandparents, but they are said to have shown her no affection."

and

"For Atefah's father the pain of her death remains raw. "She was my love, my heart... I did everything for her, everything I could," he says.

He did not get the chance to say goodbye."

Yeah, cheers dearest Papa.

Although the situation described is appalling this is just bad journalism. It is bad enough already, no need to add the "tear-jerking" final words from the druggy father who the article has previously accused of being the world's worst dad. Anyway, it is too late to feel guilty now matey.

Don't make assumptions. Ever heard of therapeutic drug addiction?

Hmmm... I think the issue is that a 16 year old girl who was in reality the victim, was executed. But as usual some people have turned it into a "lets make excuses for islam" thread. There is simply no excuse for rape, abuse and a 9 years age of consent. This type of tin pot legal system that only really applies to men and treats women as the posessions of men, to be used and abused at will, but if a woman steps out of line she is stoned or hung, is totally inexcusable.

Not our society/culture though is it? I expect worse happens in, for example, Africa or parts of the far east. Though when you have a country without any kind of real democracy controlled by a religion where the core principles of democracy goes against the grain, this is what you can expect.