(November 27, 2013 at 4:52 am)Rayaan Wrote: The stoning to death punishment existed way before Islam - it was a Jewish law, as dictated in the Old Testament.
The Prophet Muhammad continued implementing that law until a new revelation came regarding the punishment for adultery, which is now 100 lashes for both male and female.
So god did one bout of revelations, then came back and did another one because presumably he changed his mind or got it wrong the first time? I'm glad that the western world has abolished what is essentially extreme physical torture. You proudly pronounce that lashing is a legitemate form of punishment whereas stoning is something that you'd prefer to distance yourself from. Both are barbaric.
Quote:The Quran doesn't say anything about stoning the adulterers at all. The punishment is 100 lashes, and there has to be at least 4 witnesses who saw the act in order to implement a lashing (which is extremely unlikely to happen), OR that the adulterers confessed their sin to someone (which they shouldn't), but if neither of those conditions are met, then the lashing punishment cannot be enforced if even they are actually guilty of adultery.
And the punishment for a slave girl is half of that punishment (per Surah 4:25) - which is 50 lashes - so it wouldn't make sense to say that slave girls should get "half the punishment of stoning to death" if stoning was really the punishment prescribed by the Quran. What could be "half" the punishment of stoning to death?
So we've got an appeal for witnesses as perscribed in 5th century desert conditions, which have next to no relevance to modern day urban living spaces outside of the desert. Either way, as absurd as the entire qu'ranic discourse is, this is still barbaric tosh whichever way you look at it. What's that bit about the slave girl again? Any condemnation of slavery in the qu'ran or do you believe that slavery is not only authorised but that slaves should only be tortured half as bad as non slaves?
Quote: ... which is why people feel less afraid committing those graver crimes.
Prisons don't work too well either.
If you're trying to imply that the threat of barbaric punishments will deter crime then you're completely wrong. I see you cited a bbc article regarding how prisons don't work. Many people who acknowledge that re-offending rates are so high (in many parts of the east and west) propose that prison shouldn't be about punishment at all, but more about rehabilitation. There are still many countries that impose barbaric torture techniques and even the death penalty, especially muslim countries, yet they do not deter crime at all. In fact, the correlation between tough penal systems with crime rates + inequality is staggering. You should read the spirit level by Richard Wilkinson, although this would mean opening your mind to sources outside of Islam. Either way, the threat of brutal torture doesn't stop crime at all, and in many cases the countries that impose such disgusting punishments as lashing and stoning are amongst the most miserable and corrupt on the planet.
Any way, relying on one poorly cobbled together collection of desert ramblings for 'rules' on punishments and law is truly depressing. Only through the wisdom of collected works, democracy, pluralism and pragmatism can law really begin to approach anything that could constitute being 'just'. Relying on centuries old hearsay from some desert brutes is beyond ridiculous. Islam is beyond ridiculous.
