Gang-Raped Victim in Saudi Arabia gets 90 Lashes, Some Rapists get 10 Months

Any country that basis their system of laws on Islamic Shari'ah is stupid IMHO. their constitution

Just take your pick.....

DD

 

We are talking about a democracy and in a democracy the majority rules. Our country isn't a pure democracy.

Of course there is a chance we are wrong. There's a big chance you are wrong. This is debate and discuss we are free to express opinions. That said if a 100% of Saudis feel it is right well that's good for them. None of that changes that we are free to express our dissaproval.

You criticize PC yet you are taking the ultimate PC position that we shouldn't say anything out of respect.

You are free to make any assertion you want. That doesn't make it correct and the truth is unless you are a mind reader you can never know why I truly thought that way. Like us expressing our dissaproval though you are free to express your opinion. That said though I will let what I wrote in that thread speak for itself.

How do you know Chinese treatment of Tibetans isn't a cultural value? Aren't you doing exactly what you criticize others for? Looking at it with a cultural bias and declaring this is horrible and genocide? My understanding is that the Chinese are perfectly fine with Tibetans who respect and obey the PRC law so why are you declaring this is genocide when this is about people living in Tibet respecting the law?

Questionable statistic but even taking it at face vaule yes we can still say that our culture is terrible and work to reform it. I will certainly say that women in America shouldn't be raped. I will even say that women who get in a car with a strange man shouldn't be lashed 90 TIMES in the US! Just because they are Saudis doesn't mean that I will give them a break.

Its a continued pattern of history that women are lashed and stoned to death under Shari'a law too.

Except that you're trying to make it relative to Arab culture. One of the major points of your argument is that we shouldn't be criticizing the Saudis since our culture has problems.

 

Yeah, this is a widely known stat. I remember it from freshman orientation in college. Everyone was required to attend a seminar on rape.

But that was a long time ago. Maybe we're a better country now?

Unfortunately not:

http://oak.cats.ohiou.edu/~ad361896/anne/cease/rapestatisticspage.html

 

And you saw here we have no barbaric laws? Can you honestly say that?

And can you say that from a perspective of a Saudi Woman?

 

Do you hate women? Most rapes go unreported dude.

 

I looked at the link and don't buy it. I saw no supporting evidence for those figures. I've seen 1 out of 6 with a little research, which is bad enough, but I think 33% is a gross exaggeration.



D&D. Dumb and Dumber.

 

I have heard 25% a lot. I think 33% is high, but 16% is low.

Regardless - we agree that it's enormously high - and from their standpoint, we're the barbarians. Could you at least see that perspective? Disregard anything but that....

 

Well I guess nowadays all country leaders are based on an economic mindset, in other words 'business men', they don't really care about 'human rights', they care more about economic gain than anything else

 

So you are saying I am more likely wrong then you. Ok...and that's suppose to prove? Yeah, you can express whatever you like. You can say the world is flat. THat's a provable statement to be either right or wrong.

But then you can say that god loves you - which no one can really argue. You can also say you think Arabs are scum. Is that wrong or true?

Guess what - that's not the point i'm trying to make. And no, I'm not saying you shouldn't say anything out of respect. Where did I say that? Are you using strawman's again? C'mon. You missed the whole point.

I'm just saying there is ANOTHER perspective which is as equally valid.

Nothing more, nothing less. No need to spin it into anti-PC to win an argument.

Umm - because they are killing the Tibetians for WHO THEY ARE - Tibetians. That's messed up. It's one thing to have social rules that you might not like, it's another to want to wipe out a people to take their land. Geez, I'm shocked you can find the two the same. Intriguing. I would be willing to consider it - as I am open minded, but you need to show a better link and a strong point. Right now you might as well argue that it's culturally ok to kill all black people in the world because white is good - and then say that's what Arabs and Muslims do. Crazy line of thinking I have to say.

But people here aren't criticizing Saudi Culture - they are putting it down as barbaric and beneath our own. If you do that, then comparisons are fair.

It's one thing to say hey - that's not right. It's another to judge and condemn. I guess you don't see the difference. Maybe you are just programmed to dismiss anything I write - which is fine. See, it's no longer possible for me to engage in debate. Oh well - ciao!

 

I highly doubt that the Chinese govt is killing Tibetans simply for being Tibetans. If Tibetans (or anyone else in China for that matter) does things to challenge or resist or defy govt rule or authority then the govt is known to come down with a heavy hand. I'm not agreeing with that but that isn't anywhere near as saying that they killing Tibetans simply because they are Tibetans. I have never heard or read anywhere that Tibetans are killed just by being Tibetans but if that were the case they would hardly be any Tibetans left today.

 

Right, and the Germans killed the Jews not for being Jews. HA!

So if the Tibetians were actually chinese - then that wouldn't be a problem right? By the way, the CHinese are doing just that - breeding more Chinese in Tibet to make it less Tibetian and thus eliminate the culture entirely.

What the CHinese are doing is similar to the Taliban. Which was to wipe out the previous culture or any history of it. So you are saying the Taliban are ok right?

 

Define Tibetan culture first, moron.

 

Take it easy. I was just going on along with your statement that we could be wrong. There's a chance you could be wrong too. Pardon the exagerration with the term "big chance" but if you're going to claim that other people are wrong but you don't know for sure then shouldn't you concede that you too might be wrong?

Why are you criticizing people for saying this is barbaric then? If there is another point perspective what is wrong with DD or anyone else saying they think that Saudi laws are barbaric? I've said myself that many of our laws are barbaric but as a matter of principle that doesn't prevent me from criticizing Saudi Arabia.

For that matter why did your first post in this thread mention that this is Saudi laws and this was done according to Saudi laws:

Right there are you basically saying that we shouldn't judge and dismiss because it is their laws. In other words we should respect their laws.

You were the one who brought up the point of political correctness in the first place:

So we can't bring PC but you can? Not exactly sporting.

This has already been responded to by others but I will say this. Treatment of Tibetans by the PRC is awful and should be changed. That doesn't prevent me from also criticizing the Saudis because as a matter of principle I believe that such barbarism shouldn't be tolerated in any society. The problem that you have is that by your own words we should understand another culture before criticizing it. Now are you saying you don't fully understand Saudi culture so you refrain from criticizing it but you understand PRC culture Tibetans perfectly so you can bash away? Have you polled people in the PRC to ask if they think that the treatment of Tibetans is barbaric? What if most people in the PRC think its fine?

These are the questions you asked of us to consider when criticizing the Saudis so shouldn't you ask the same questions before criticizing the PRC?

Have you asked DD,FB if they think that US culture isn't barbaric? I've already I think much of the US is barbaric and do what I can to remedy that. It sounds like you're making presumptions.

Except you're presuming that you know exactly what others are saying.
You're presuming that criticism of Saudi Arabia means that we don't also agree there are a lot of problems with us. You're doing exactly what you criticize others for.

Now you're just being petulant. If you don't feel like you're getting a fair shake in D & D I'm sorry you get that impression. I'm happy to debate and discuss with you. I even agree with you on a lot of the issues you bring up but that doesn't mean I'm not going to challenge arguments that I don't think are logical or are incorrect. That applies to anyone else in the D & D.

That said to you in particular though frankly this is something you brought on yourself. You've said several times how you are here to challenge people's thinking. Fine and good we should be challenged. That doesn't mean we won't challenge you back.

 

The Germans did kill Jews simply for being Jews, this is undeniable. We all know about the Holocaust. Jews were rounded up en masse and killed in death camps simply for being Jews.

But I have never read or heard that the Chinese govt is doing anything remotely like that. There are stories of repression and I'm sure Tibetans are being jailed or even killed for going against the govt. But I have never heard that this is done simply for only being Tibetan a la the Holocaust. To imply or suggest that is happening is an incredible claim and one that I have no reason to believe is happening or has ever happened because I highly doubt such a thing could happen without a massive outcry from the world community. Secondly if it were happening all the Tibetans would have been wiped out already but that is clearly not the case.

 

Or may be you are just a well-known moron around here? How can someone who doesn't even know the meaning of 'manslaughter' not be called a moron anyway?

New Yorker: Manslaughter is less because it doesn result in death

So are you able to convince yourself that you are a moron now? Let me know if you still need further help. I will find you more proofs.

 

as i was saying - you have a lot of people here who are more about expressing their buried anger and frustrations rather then civil debate.

 

Typical... when discussing this subject we get reference to current laws in Muslim countries that punish the victim...

The hudood ordinance of Pakistan was brought up... now a lot of traditional Jurists are petitioning to get rid of these un-Islamic laws (such as justice Mufti Taqi Usmani).

As for Saudi, if you wanna deny the Wahhabi influence, there is no doubt in my mind that the reason for such overbearing and strict laws is because of Wahhabi "interpretation" (the reason for quotations is because it's not really interpretation, but a complete disregard for Islamic juristic principles and methodology, also called 'usool').

It's typical of people to say "oh Muslims think those violent interpretations of Islam are valid, therefore they are valid". And that's the point that few people want to dispute. In order to make religion look bad, you have to delve into the murky waters of relativism ("oh ALL interpretations are valid from my viewpoint, and this includes the violent ones that people are embracing, therefore there's something wrong with the religion").

Punishing the victim in a rape crime is NOT a part of Sunni Islamic tradition. Read any hanafi/shafi/maliki/hanbali jurisprudence manual, and the punishments for the rapist are EXTREMELY harsh. This is historically true also, a lot of unjust laws have resulted as a result of the dissolution of the Ottoman empire (not saying that all Ottoman laws were perfect, but a lot of the modern governments openly engage in unislamic conduct moreso than before. eh, could be a result of the European colonial era).

 

PS, hey NewYorker, it's DisTruck from the chat, I finally got around to registering.

 

Sorry for the triple post, but I forgot to add one more thing.

A lot of my first posts may be a little hard to follow, I was a bit frustrated when writing this.

My central point is that:

So what if some Islamic governments punish the victim, that doesn't make it valid or represented of traditional Islamic jurisprudence.

You have to see the conclusions former jurists came toand what they interpreted (it's important to have a critical historical examination before passing off conclusions on Islam or Muslims). There are many religious Muslims that oppose a lot of atrocities going on in the Middle East.

 

Interesting post. Howdy!

You are certainly right that Saudi Arabia's version of Islam, supported by the immense royal family (how many "princes" are there? Hundreds? A couple of thousand?), is extreme, and the fact that the aristocracy loves to party outside the country makes what they do even more maddening. Someday, that country is simply going to blow up. We'll be hated even more than we are now because we propped the corrupt system up for so long. Better to be truer to our supposed values now, then to endlessly play the hypocrite, which amounts to supporting the very extremism that is assaulting us today.

I understand very well that nations have to act in their interests, and that it often means being in bed with those we despise, but it's past time, in my opinion, to show the Saudi royal family that we simply can't go on this way. We could start by calling our ambassador home for "consultations" over their medieval treatment of women in instances like that being discussed. It would at least be something. Who knows... they might even notice.

PS: I wouldn't say, "so what," about a woman getting 90 lashes because she was raped, or because she allegedly rode in a car with a man.



D&D. Up and Down.