Blinding of an attacker in Iran

[frankiej]

But then your no better than he is.

hmmm... lets look at this statment alone. I'm no better than he is. Hmmh, Really?

I would argue that I'm already much better than he is.
I don't pray to a god that rewards the maming and killing of innocent people.
I don't practice a religion that condones the brutal torture of your children for the slightest of infractions.
I don't feel some god-given right to physically assault people who don't believe the way I do.
I would never throw flesh eating acid on the face of an individual who simply didn't wish to spend his or her time with me.

As a matter of fact, I feel a bullet in the brain is far more merciful than having your eyeballs burned out of your head with drops of acid. I would opt for the bullet myself, but maybe that's just me.

I feel, that everything I've said in this thread is not only warranted, but has shown that I am most certainly - better than this muslim douchebag is.
However, you certainly do have a right to your opinion - and since you are not a muslim female, I guess I won't burn your face off for it.

Yes, perhaps my statement probably wasn't the right one, I accept that and apologise for it.
Yes I would assume you are better than him, but i simply say that puting him to death is wrong, as is burning his eyes off his freaking face.

---

I hope the fact that the blinding has been postponed is a sign that the country wants to come out of the dark ages.

I would hope so, but it seems unlikely while religion is still intertwined with state.

[Rayaan]

This is one of the many things which is not grounded in the Islamic teachings. Pouring acid on one's face? That is clearly not justifiable in Islam.

The only punishments that I am aware of are cutting the hands of thieves, lashing the criminal, and stoning for committing adultery if one is married. Everything else, the qadi (or jurist) was given the choice of deterring based upon whatever means he saw most effective for the eradication of that particular act or its effect in society, whether it was limited lashing, imprisonment, or anything else short of death. So, many of these brutal things are not mentioned in the Quran.

Most importantly, Islam's fundamental principles are more or less universally agreed upon. However there are indeed difference of opinion on several matters which not essentially a part of the core. These opinions are interpretations of different people. Strictly speaking, even these differences are unjustified and the the majority would argue that the correct interpretation is the one which we have received from the first generation of Muslims and scholars. However, some people do form their own opinion on certain issues and that would be called their own interpretation. Sometimes, they follow their emotions and their anger under the guise of doing it for Islam so that they can justify their actions to other Muslims.

[Cinjin]

Yes, perhaps my statement probably wasn't the right one, I accept that and apologise for it.
Yes I would assume you are better than him, but i simply say that puting him to death is wrong, as is burning his eyes off his freaking face.

---

You don't have to apologize frankie.

I just think that the people of Iran deserve to reap what their religion sows. Do I think this brutal punishment is right? No, but I don't think anything in that backward land is right - why should their justice be any different.

That man was aware of his country's barbaric policies. He rolled the dice. He lost. I say if Iran wants to burn in his eyes out - have at it ... it's NONE of our business.

---

This is one of the many things which is not grounded in the Islamic teachings. Pouring acid on one's face? That is clearly not justifiable in Islam.

Give me a break Rayaan. Arabs have proven time and time again that EVERYTHING is justifiable according to Islam ... it's just a matter of how you look at it.

Your religion is terrifying.

[JohnDG]

Bullets are cheap. Put one in his head and call it good.

Sad but it is the only way sometimes.

[bozo]

This is one of the many things which is not grounded in the Islamic teachings. Pouring acid on one's face? That is clearly not justifiable in Islam.

The only punishments that I am aware of are cutting the hands of thieves, lashing the criminal, and stoning for committing adultery if one is married. Everything else, the qadi (or jurist) was given the choice of deterring based upon whatever means he saw most effective for the eradication of that particular act or its effect in society, whether it was limited lashing, imprisonment, or anything else short of death. So, many of these brutal things are not mentioned in the Quran.

Most importantly, Islam's fundamental principles are more or less universally agreed upon. However there are indeed difference of opinion on several matters which not essentially a part of the core. These opinions are interpretations of different people. Strictly speaking, even these differences are unjustified and the the majority would argue that the correct interpretation is the one which we have received from the first generation of Muslims and scholars. However, some people do form their own opinion on certain issues and that would be called their own interpretation. Sometimes, they follow their emotions and their anger under the guise of doing it for Islam so that they can justify their actions to other Muslims.

I only know what I have seen reported about the Iran justice system, which is that it is based on retribution. Most apposite in this case to liken it to the biblical " eye for an eye "! Does Islam preach the same?

[alemcodon]

islam doesnt preach eye for an eye....

it preaches it is better to forgive...as was the case for raymon davis, and if the victims family forgive, then the 'criminal' should reward them healthily, not pay them to let you off (blood money) what most people assume and label, although there is a fine line between them.

Mr Rayaan, islamic law doesnt say stoning for adultry, this was a universal law over 1000yrs ago and may have been used by past islamic governments, as it was used by past indian, christian and the rest of the worlds governments too over 1000yrs ago.

Islamic law is designed to be flexible depending on the state of the people, if society is crumbling then laws should be more harsh, as was the case in afghanistan after russian war, if society is civil then laws can be relaxed.

Islamic law does oppose lenghty prison sentences as this is costly to the state, and will not rehabilitate the criminal, but will only worsen their mental state, as your own stats prove, over 90% re-offend, and costs the state over $3billion annually (lower end of estimate).

people use the practices of old islamic empires to justify or implement these rules today, but someone show me a verse in the quraan which prescribes stoning or death for adultry? it just says it is a sin, as is backbiting, murder and stealing a 1p mojo.

Its funny how everyone opposes the eye for eye theorum, but you were all jumping for joy when USA wanted to invade afghanistan and iraq, and youll be jumping for joy when they try to invade iran too....how come no-one said anything about eye for an eye then? when your the victim, all you can think about is eye for eye..and you cant blame a victim of such a horrific crime to want the prepetrator blind or dead. Personally i think people like that have no plave in society, at the very least they should be banished.

maybe iran could invade england, and make it like australia, a place to ship all the criminals.... - wouldnt that be lovely, they could join our police force, they cant be much worse than the cops here.

by your governments own admission, the wars were based on falsified, exagerated and manipulated 'evidence' for weapons of mass destruction. FBI didnt even list bin laden as wanted for 9/11 because there was no evidence, but it was ok to invade afghanistan and iraq and 10 yrs later still deploying more troops, and 10 yrs later, you will still be deploying more troops (not your own children tho), and still be supporting the war.

500,000 iraqi babies have died directly due to the sanctions BEFORE the war, but its a price worht paying to 'liberate' the iraqi people. And its ok to use depleted uraniuim even though scientific research AND evidence has shown it to be responsible for the most horrifying birth defects...

[Rayaan]

Give me a break Rayaan. Arabs have proven time and time again that EVERYTHING is justifiable according to Islam ... it's just a matter of how you look at it.

No, not everything. Only those acts are justifiable in Islam which are supported by sound interpretations of the Quran and Hadiths.

I only know what I have seen reported about the Iran justice system, which is that it is based on retribution. Most apposite in this case to liken it to the biblical " eye for an eye "! Does Islam preach the same?

I think an "eye for an eye" would be a shallow description of the Islamic way of governing. It depends on what you mean for any "eye for an eye."

Generally speaking, Islam does allow us to protect ourselves in the face of extreme violence, but for those who merely speak bad about Islam (or the Prophet), we are not taught to hurt them nor to speak bad about them. Also, there are rules in the Quran regarding the way Muslims should defend themselves physically.

[Anomalocaris]

No, not everything. Only those acts are justifiable in Islam which are supported by sound interpretations of the Quran and Hadiths.

Let's just say what is thought to be justifiable by those who believe in the Quran is very often a reflection of their own inner barbarity and their outer cultural, scientific, social and economic backwardness, which the belief in quran directly and indirectly caused by promoting a belief in unchallengeable sacredness of some text that is claimed much conviction, but no evidence, to be truth that were said, with much conviction but no evidence, to have been revealed by, what is again said with much conviction, but no evidence, a divine entity.

[bozo]

Give me a break Rayaan. Arabs have proven time and time again that EVERYTHING is justifiable according to Islam ... it's just a matter of how you look at it.

No, not everything. Only those acts are justifiable in Islam which are supported by sound interpretations of the Quran and Hadiths.

I only know what I have seen reported about the Iran justice system, which is that it is based on retribution. Most apposite in this case to liken it to the biblical " eye for an eye "! Does Islam preach the same?

I think an "eye for an eye" would be a shallow description of the Islamic way of governing. It depends on what you mean for any "eye for an eye."

Generally speaking, Islam does allow us to protect ourselves in the face of extreme violence, but for those who merely speak bad about Islam (or the Prophet), we are not taught to hurt them nor to speak bad about them. Also, there are rules in the Quran regarding the way Muslims should defend themselves physically.

Rayaan,with due respect you haven't answered my question. Is Iran being true to Islam if it has a retributive justice system?

[Rayaan]

Is Iran being true to Islam if it has a retributive justice system?

Sorry, I don't know too much about the Iran justice system, but from what I understand so far, it seems that there are many examples (such as this) which are not in agreement with Islam.