qur'an & violence against women/girls

I think there is a major disconnect between what we're actually discussing here.

First of all, the reason I and I think many others doubted the sincerity of the person who started this topic is this: take a look at the thread title, and the OP. It seems very clear that the person was asking about Islam (and specifically the Qur'an)'s view of women, stoning, and all these other issues that have been brought up in this thread (punishments for crimes such as theft, etc). Many of us have tried to explain the Islamic and Qur'anic perspectives on these issues using historical evidence, clear references to the texts, and what various interpretations of scholars on the more 'controversial' verses. Chadwick did not once try to engage us regarding our answers, but instead would either arbitrarily reference an obscure story occurring in some part of the world or link us to some youtube video of a nobody who calls himself "imam" going off on an idiotic rant about something. Tell me--is this what a discussion is supposed to look like?

The problem is: chadwick is pretending to be curious about what Islam says, but he responds to the answers he's given with what various, random (to the point of where I've never heard of them and they need youtube to give them a platform--and often, their videos have more "dislikes" than "likes") Muslims say. You see the difference? I doubt chadwick does, because in the OP he admitted himself to not even knowing the difference between "Islam" and "Muslim." It seems that the idea of a random Muslim having an opinion that is at odds with what Islam says goes beyond chadwick's comprehension.

Furthermore, you yourself and many others on here seem to be missing VivaPalestina's point. First, I think to simplify the death penalty as it is practiced in Western countries to "you murder/rape, then you get punished" is problematic because it ignores the abuse that is associated with this. There are very clear systematic and institutional policies that discriminate against minorities in this country, and often lead to their social disenfranchisement or even, yes, them being killed. Many are on deathrow unjustly, despite the amazing achievements of modern science, due to these policies. I know it's easy to ignore the fact that these policies exist when you're not one of these minorities, but maybe you should get out your copy of Vs. and listen to WMA again. Take a look at the reports of NYPD spying on Muslims, take a look at the various stories of FBI entrapment in terror cases, or just read one fucking article about the way African Americans are disenfranchised and often given insane sentences for crimes (sometimes crimes they did not even commit).

The point is this: if we recognize that minorities are discriminated against and that it sometimes (if even rarely) leads to them being put to death (such as Troy Davis) unjustly, then what you guys are debating is merely the method of execution. Is there really a less humane way of killing someone unjustly? Perhaps, but getting lost in the details of an unjust punishment overshadows the real problem of it taking place at all! A turd wearing a bow is still a turd.

If we instead want to talk about the motivations or causes of these unjust punishments taking place, because you reeeally want to differentiate and you just cannot accept that these 2 cases are similar, then we have to go back to the original question that this thread presented: Is Islam to blame for the few cases of stonings that have taken place? We have already presented sufficient evidence in my opinion to show that it is not. I have yet to receive a response suggesting it is. Until then, you guys are trying to understand why stonings take place in a part of the world where you don't understand its languages, history, politics, religions, the history of its interaction with Western colonial/imperial forces, or the various legal battles that have been fought for hundreds of years that have given it the system it has today. So if you're looking for a simple answer, you probably won't get it.

fuck wrote:

I think there is a major disconnect between what we're actually discussing here.

First of all, the reason I and I think many others doubted the sincerity of the person who started this topic is this: take a look at the thread title, and the OP. It seems very clear that the person was asking about Islam (and specifically the Qur'an)'s view of women, stoning, and all these other issues that have been brought up in this thread (punishments for crimes such as theft, etc). Many of us have tried to explain the Islamic and Qur'anic perspectives on these issues using historical evidence, clear references to the texts, and what various interpretations of scholars on the more 'controversial' verses. Chadwick did not once try to engage us regarding our answers, but instead would either arbitrarily reference an obscure story occurring in some part of the world or link us to some youtube video of a nobody who calls himself "imam" going off on an idiotic rant about something. Tell me--is this what a discussion is supposed to look like?

The problem is: chadwick is pretending to be curious about what Islam says, but he responds to the answers he's given with what various, random (to the point of where I've never heard of them and they need youtube to give them a platform--and often, their videos have more "dislikes" than "likes") Muslims say. You see the difference? I doubt chadwick does, because in the OP he admitted himself to not even knowing the difference between "Islam" and "Muslim." It seems that the idea of a random Muslim having an opinion that is at odds with what Islam says goes beyond chadwick's comprehension.

Furthermore, you yourself and many others on here seem to be missing VivaPalestina's point. First, I think to simplify the death penalty as it is practiced in Western countries to "you murder/rape, then you get punished" is problematic because it ignores the abuse that is associated with this. There are very clear systematic and institutional policies that discriminate against minorities in this country, and often lead to their social disenfranchisement or even, yes, them being killed. Many are on deathrow unjustly, despite the amazing achievements of modern science, due to these policies. I know it's easy to ignore the fact that these policies exist when you're not one of these minorities, but maybe you should get out your copy of Vs. and listen to WMA again. Take a look at the reports of NYPD spying on Muslims, take a look at the various stories of FBI entrapment in terror cases, or just read one fucking article about the way African Americans are disenfranchised and often given insane sentences for crimes (sometimes crimes they did not even commit).

The point is this: if we recognize that minorities are discriminated against and that it sometimes (if even rarely) leads to them being put to death (such as Troy Davis) unjustly, then what you guys are debating is merely the method of execution. Is there really a less humane way of killing someone unjustly? Perhaps, but getting lost in the details of an unjust punishment overshadows the real problem of it taking place at all! A turd wearing a bow is still a turd.

If we instead want to talk about the motivations or causes of these unjust punishments taking place, because you reeeally want to differentiate and you just cannot accept that these 2 cases are similar, then we have to go back to the original question that this thread presented: Is Islam to blame for the few cases of stonings that have taken place? We have already presented sufficient evidence in my opinion to show that it is not. I have yet to receive a response suggesting it is. Until then, you guys are trying to understand why stonings take place in a part of the world where you don't understand its languages, history, politics, religions, the history of its interaction with Western colonial/imperial forces, or the various legal battles that have been fought for hundreds of years that have given it the system it has today. So if you're looking for a simple answer, you probably won't get it.

I am not going to deny that discrimination against minorities does exist. And I would tell you that such behaviour is unacceptable- there is a social movement to raise awareness for the inequities that exist. But don't tell us that the DP is almost exclusive for minorities- the last two high profile executions I have read about were white males. In the DP thread, the people I have argued that need to be executed are white (Olson, Pickton, Shearing). The crime is in question from my perspective- not the color of one's skin.

When you say:

if we recognize that minorities are discriminated against and that it sometimes (if even rarely) leads to them being put to death (such as Troy Davis) unjustly, then what you guys are debating is merely the method of execution. Is there really a less humane way of killing someone unjustly? Perhaps, but getting lost in the details of an unjust punishment overshadows the real problem of it taking place at all! A turd wearing a bow is still a turd.

and

Until then, you guys are trying to understand why stonings take place in a part of the world where you don't understand its languages, history, politics, religions, the history of its interaction with Western colonial/imperial forces, or the various legal battles that have been fought for hundreds of years that have given it the system it has today. So if you're looking for a simple answer, you probably won't get it.

It doesn't sound as if you are as strongly opposed to some of the practices some people have been objecting to.

In my mind, it is weak to defend the public stoning for a woman's adulterous behaviour by making a comparison to the execution of a violent criminal convicted of rape and murder. They are not similar at all, get real. If women in the west were getting executed for having affairs, then we could have a comparison and a debate about turds being turds.

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

In my mind, it is weak to defend the public stoning for a woman's adulterous behaviour by making a comparison to the execution of a violent criminal convicted of rape and murder. They are not similar at all, get real. If women in the west were getting executed for having affairs, then we could have a comparison and a debate about turds being turds.

This exactly.

It does not make me a hypocrite to condemn this practice of public stoning of women whose only "crime" is adultery and whose fate was sealed the second their loving husband made the accusation. Say what you will about the death penalty in the West. (We have a thread for it here on AMT. Come join the debate.) What every convicted felon on death row has in common with each other that they do not have in common with these poor women is that they were accused, tried, and convicted for a terrible crime, often no less than multiple murder. You cannot say the same for any woman who faces this horrible fate of public stoning. Again...public stoning. In 20fucking13.

Yet the response is "Yeah...but...America..."

fuck wrote:

I think there is a major disconnect between what we're actually discussing here.

First of all, the reason I and I think many others doubted the sincerity of the person who started this topic is this: take a look at the thread title, and the OP. It seems very clear that the person was asking about Islam (and specifically the Qur'an)'s view of women, stoning, and all these other issues that have been brought up in this thread (punishments for crimes such as theft, etc). Many of us have tried to explain the Islamic and Qur'anic perspectives on these issues using historical evidence, clear references to the texts, and what various interpretations of scholars on the more 'controversial' verses. Chadwick did not once try to engage us regarding our answers, but instead would either arbitrarily reference an obscure story occurring in some part of the world or link us to some youtube video of a nobody who calls himself "imam" going off on an idiotic rant about something. Tell me--is this what a discussion is supposed to look like?

The problem is: chadwick is pretending to be curious about what Islam says, but he responds to the answers he's given with what various, random (to the point of where I've never heard of them and they need youtube to give them a platform--and often, their videos have more "dislikes" than "likes") Muslims say. You see the difference? I doubt chadwick does, because in the OP he admitted himself to not even knowing the difference between "Islam" and "Muslim." It seems that the idea of a random Muslim having an opinion that is at odds with what Islam says goes beyond chadwick's comprehension.

Furthermore, you yourself and many others on here seem to be missing VivaPalestina's point. First, I think to simplify the death penalty as it is practiced in Western countries to "you murder/rape, then you get punished" is problematic because it ignores the abuse that is associated with this. There are very clear systematic and institutional policies that discriminate against minorities in this country, and often lead to their social disenfranchisement or even, yes, them being killed. Many are on deathrow unjustly, despite the amazing achievements of modern science, due to these policies. I know it's easy to ignore the fact that these policies exist when you're not one of these minorities, but maybe you should get out your copy of Vs. and listen to WMA again. Take a look at the reports of NYPD spying on Muslims, take a look at the various stories of FBI entrapment in terror cases, or just read one fucking article about the way African Americans are disenfranchised and often given insane sentences for crimes (sometimes crimes they did not even commit).

The point is this: if we recognize that minorities are discriminated against and that it sometimes (if even rarely) leads to them being put to death (such as Troy Davis) unjustly, then what you guys are debating is merely the method of execution. Is there really a less humane way of killing someone unjustly? Perhaps, but getting lost in the details of an unjust punishment overshadows the real problem of it taking place at all! A turd wearing a bow is still a turd.

If we instead want to talk about the motivations or causes of these unjust punishments taking place, because you reeeally want to differentiate and you just cannot accept that these 2 cases are similar, then we have to go back to the original question that this thread presented: Is Islam to blame for the few cases of stonings that have taken place? We have already presented sufficient evidence in my opinion to show that it is not. I have yet to receive a response suggesting it is. Until then, you guys are trying to understand why stonings take place in a part of the world where you don't understand its languages, history, politics, religions, the history of its interaction with Western colonial/imperial forces, or the various legal battles that have been fought for hundreds of years that have given it the system it has today. So if you're looking for a simple answer, you probably won't get it.

Great post

JimmyV wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

In my mind, it is weak to defend the public stoning for a woman's adulterous behaviour by making a comparison to the execution of a violent criminal convicted of rape and murder. They are not similar at all, get real. If women in the west were getting executed for having affairs, then we could have a comparison and a debate about turds being turds.

This exactly.

It does not make me a hypocrite to condemn this practice of public stoning of women whose only "crime" is adultery and whose fate was sealed the second their loving husband made the accusation. Say what you will about the death penalty in the West. (We have a thread for it here on AMT. Come join the debate.) What every convicted felon on death row has in common with each other that they do not have in common with these poor women is that they were accused, tried, and convicted for a terrible crime, often no less than multiple murder. You cannot say the same for any woman who faces this horrible fate of public stoning. Again...public stoning. In 20fucking13.

Yet the response is "Yeah...but...America..."

No, the response is not But America, it's AND America, both are different, both are wrong, I can admit that both ate wrong, you can not, when you say child murderers, I think Damien Echols who sat on death row, no DNA, a sham trial and a persecution that wasted half his life....so it's AND America. I have no problem condemning the death penalty in both environments, it's evident that you do.

VivaPalestina wrote:

I in no way meant to lessen the severity of what was happening to these women. That was never my point. Since that it's how it's coming across...and I believe the thread did start disingenuously, I won't add anymore to it.

I fully understand the mistake people are making by generalizing radical Muslim behaviour to all Muslims. I can certainly understand why some might feel defensive given this- I have come to the defence of some of our Muslim contributors when unfairly attacked on this forum. I have nothing against Muslim people, but I have a lot against cruel and unfair treatment of women.

Regardless of how one might be personally affected by general criticisms that do not apply to them, I don't think it is reasonable or appropriate to in any way rationalize the extreme behaviours that have been pointed out in this thread. Stoning a woman to death or whipping them is medieval in nature: these behaviours are deplorable and need to stop. It has been put to me that there is no simple answer to the complexity of the situation, however I don't know exactly what 'complex answer' I might hear that would have me understand why such actions would be condoned.