Translate

Tuesday, 19 April 2016

Claire Khaw tries to save adulterers from being stoned, but may not have succeeded


Fairly.
What would happen to her though?
Firstly, the prosecution will assess if there is any evidence against her, for which she can be tried.
If there isn't, there would be no trial.
If there is, she would stand trial.
Secondly, the court will listen to the prosecution and the defence along with all witnesses and evidence.
They have the dress. They know it is her dress and they know it is stained with his DNA.
Have you read my link?
No.
Should I?
Of course!
I want you to tell me if what I think would happen is correct.
Does it add any benefit to the progression of science?
We are not talking about science, are we? We are talking about law and morality.
Pure or social?
Social science.
We are talking about sharia law, actually.
Read it and you will see.
Ok.
I've read it.
And ... ?
The verse 4/15 refers to sexual intercourse
So, your inference isn't correct.
What is the point of 24:2 then?
24:2 is about the non married man / woman committing fornication.
Lewd act short of full intercourse makes more sense.
4;15 is about married women.
Sahih International: Those who commit unlawful sexual intercourse of your women - bring against them four [witnesses] from among you. And if they testify, confine the guilty women to houses until death takes them or Allah ordains for them [another] way. Pickthall: As for those of your women who are guilty of lewdness, call to witness four of you against them. And if they testify (to the truth of the allegation) then confine them to the houses until death take them or (until) Allah appoint for them a way (through new legislation). Yusuf Ali: If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, Take the evidence of four (Reliable) witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them, or Allah ordain for them some (other) way. Shakir: And as for those who are guilty of an indecency from among your women, call to witnesses against them four (witnesses) from among you; then if they bear witness confine them to the houses until death takes them away or Allah opens some way for them. Muhammad Sarwar: Those of your women who commit fornication, let four (Muslim) witness testify to their act. If there is sufficient testimony, confine them to their homes until they die, or until God provides a way for their freedom. Mohsin Khan: And those of your women who commit illegal sexual intercourse, take the evidence of four witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them (i.e. women) to houses until death comes to them or Allah ordains for them some (other) way. Arberry: Such of your women as commit indecency, call four of you to witness against them; and if they witness, then detain them in their houses until death takes them or God appoints for them a way.
It didn't mention married women.
Lewdness is just a translation of the Arabic الفاحشة
Married women is inferred by "your" women.
I don't know any Arabic, so the point's lost on me.
Sahih International: The [unmarried] woman or [unmarried] man found guilty of sexual intercourse - lash each one of them with a hundred lashes, and do not be taken by pity for them in the religion of Allah , if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a group of the believers witness their punishment. Pickthall: The adulterer and the adulteress, scourge ye each one of them (with) a hundred stripes. And let not pity for the twain withhold you from obedience to Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a party of believers witness their punishment. Yusuf Ali: The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication,- flog each of them with a hundred stripes: Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day: and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment. Shakir: (As for) the fornicatress and the fornicator, flog each of them, (giving) a hundred stripes, and let not pity for them detain you in the matter of obedience to Allah, if you believe in Allah and the last day, and let a party of believers witness their chastisement. Muhammad Sarwar: Flog the fornicatress and the fornicator with a hundred lashes each. Let there be no reluctance in enforcing the laws of God, if you have faith in God and the Day of Judgment. Let it take place in the presence of a group of believers. Mohsin Khan: The woman and the man guilty of illegal sexual intercourse, flog each of them with a hundred stripes. Let not pity withhold you in their case, in a punishment prescribed by Allah, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a party of the believers witness their punishment. (This punishment is for unmarried persons guilty of the above crime but if married persons commit it, the punishment is to stone them to death, according to Allah's Law). Arberry: The fornicatress and the fornicator -- scourge each one of them a hundred stripes, and in the matter of God's religion let no tenderness for them seize you if you believe in God and the Last Day; and let a party of the believers witness their chastisement.
Not necessarily.
So what happens to adulterers and adulteresses?
The Arabic text has to be understood in the context of the language. If you don't know Arabic, no point making judgements.
So what happens to adulterers and adulteresses?
If 24:2 does not apply to married people committing adultery, are you saying there is no punishment for adultery?
That's where there is some contention between traditionalists and modernists.
What is the source of this contention?
No clear Quranic prescription
Do you believe fornication should be punished but not adultery?
I'm not a person. I'm an organisation.
Very well then. Does your organisation believe fornication should be punished, but not adultery?
Both are legal in the UK. So, there is no judicial punishment for either. However, they are both major sins, which are detested by Islam.
If the UK were an Islamic State, are you saying Muslims would want fornication to be punished, but not adultery?
If the UK was an Islamic state, they would define the legal framework then, according to the judicial parameters set by the judiciary.
What does YOUR ORGANISATION believe to be the appropriate punishment for adultery?
Before punishing either, the state would need to propagate decency.
Decency has to be a norm.
Let us assume that has been done, then what?
Then, the judiciary would define the parameters.
And how would the judiciary define these parameters?
According to the legal reference which may be shariah, common law, European law, human right conventions, etc. We don't know, until it happens.
Don't you think it would make more sense to interpret 24:2 as applying to both fornication and adultery?
Quranic text cannot interpreted in isolation. There are contexts.
Can we ask you a question?
Of course.
Why the article about Monica in relation to Quran?
Even Americans think she's a slut. Islam can be useful to the West as a tool of slut-shaming and a weapon against degenerate feminism. While Muslims may not care about non-Muslims in the West, they should bear in mind that their degenerate culture will soon affect subsequent generations of Muslims living in the West. Degenerate Liberals will not be happy until they see the first gay marriage being conducted in a mosque. I blog about the application of sharia to demonstrate my knowledge of it too, obviously. By demonstrating its application I hope to make it more appealing. Currently Westerners have made an idol of the slut and democracy it is this worship of these idols that makes them fools to themselves. I mean by that that Feminism and Democracy are their sacred cows. My purpose is to be iconoclastic.
In a matriarchy, older and wiser heterosexual men are lower in status to the bimbo and gay man
The degeneracy of the West is evidenced by its rejection of any idea that points to its degeneracy
Thanks for sharing your perspective.
"Quranic text cannot interpreted in isolation. There are contexts." You mean you have to follow the Hadith, which says stone them to death?
The Quran was revealed in a time and space questions, addressing issues and matters. To read the verses in isolation would be to misread the purpose of revelation.
So, there are hundreds of verses which refer to specific incidents. One needs to understand those incidents, to understand the Quran.
You just want to stone adulterers/follow the Hadith, which isn't even in the Koran.
The Koran is the word of God, the Hadith only the reported speech and deeds of the prophet by his companions. I know you Muslims prefer this secondary source because, well, that's what you've been doing for centuries now.
It would be commonsensical to reject anything in the Hadith that contradicts the Koran, but it seems you lot are too far gone now to think of doing such a thing. Stoning or nothing, eh?
I don't think we ever mentioned stoning. You've brought that up.
I did notice that you were very careful to avoid mentioning it, being a Hadither.
We absolutely follow Sunnah which is a source of legislation.
We follow Quran and Sunnah as primary sources, and a whole lot of secondary sources.
Yes, I know. The nastiest things in Islam come from the Hadith, which you lot prefer to the Koran. I do know about this. You would rather stone adulterers to death.
The Koran is the PRIMARY SOURCE of the Word of God, because that is what it claims to be.
The Hadith can only be a secondary source of rules, but I know you people are immune to logic.
Much more fun to stone adulterers to death, I know.
Koran = by God
Hadith = by mortal men
BIG DIFFERENCE. But you prefer to stone adulterers to death.
So, how do you explain Verse 4:80?
Or 59:7?
Or indeed 53: 1-5?
4:80 He who obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah ; but those who turn away - We have not sent you over them as a guardian.
A clear indication that the Messenger is a source of legislation
That just means people should follow the prophet. Now that he is dead and cannot be followed, we follow the Koran, which is the PRIMARY SOURCE of God's word, trumping the Hadtih.
That's nonsense
Because the verb is in the present / future tense
59:7 has no relevance now, because it only applies to what Muslims had to do when the prophet was still alive.
What verb?
يطع
Which verb in which verse?
Do you know Arabic?
We have been through this before and I told you NO.
And you will say because I don't know Arabic you win the argument.
So, you aren't in a position to debate the Quran.
So go ahead and stone adulterers. Enjoy.
We never brought up stoning. YOU did???
What does the Hadith say about the punishment for adulterers then?
All these contortions and convolutions, just because sadists like you want to stone adulterers to death.
My advice to you is 17:36
I know Hadithers want to stone adulterers TO DEATH.
No such thing as hadithers.
My advice to you is 17:36
What does the Hadith say about adulterers?
Why are fixated on adultery?
Why are fixated on Monica? And "sluts" as you put it?
Don't judge others! Judge yourself.
Judge yourself before you will be judged by the Almighty.
Because the Koran does not say stone adulterers to death. It is an INNOVATION.
Are you Muslim?
I do judge myself.
We have been through this before. Can you scroll back to my answer?
Stop judging others, then.
Move on.
Get a life!
Are you telling me not to be judgemental? You sound just like a liberal!
How odd for someone who wants to stone adulterers to death!
Let he who has no sin cast the first stone!
Claire, stop being childish.
What does the Hadith say about the punishment for adulterers? Surely you know!
Claire, are you a nazi?
I'll tell you after you answer my question about what the Hadith says about the punishment for adulterers.
I've asked enough times.
No need. You are a nazi!
How am I a Nazi?
And you have the audacity to accuse me of being a sadist?
What a clever way of changing the subject when you won't answer the question about what the Hadith says about the punishment for adulterers.
You follow the Hadith, which means you want to stone adulterers to death.
Call me a Nazi if you want, but I ain't a member of the defunct Nazi |Party.
I am not even German.
What does the Hadith say about the punishment for adulterers?
Are you going to answer the question?
Is that you?
Yep
So, You ARE a nazi?
I have a niqab somewhere. Does that make me Muslim?
If I am photographed outside a police station with a policeman's helmet on my head, does that make me a policeman? I would suggest not. Now, how about answering my question about the punishment for adulterers in the Hadith.
So you love Hitler who gassed the Jews?
Where did I say that?
You're a Nazi.
A fascist
I am Facebook friends with Jews, who have seen those photos, incidentally.
A fascist - is that a social conservative?
Did the Jews deserve to be killed?
Is that why you hate Monica?
I thought Muslims are also social conservatives, aren't they?
Because she's a Jew?
Was Monica's ma Jewish?
 
If not, then she ain't no Jew.
Let me check.
I'm happy to have unveiled you. Bye.

You can no longer send messages to this person. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajm#In_scripture_and_jurisprudence_.28fiqh.29

The Qur'an does not mention the act of stoning. However, according to one hadith this is because the verse(s) calling for rajm were accidentally eaten by a goat.

[Narrated 'Aisha] "The verse of the stoning and of suckling an adult ten times were revealed, and they were (written) on a paper and kept under my bed. When the messenger of Allah expired and we were preoccupied with his death, a goat entered and ate away the paper."

Muslim scholars have rejected this hadith, however because all common routes of transmission of it either contain narrators charged with dishonesty when disclosing their sources, or (in the case of the version in Ibn Hanbal's Musnad) conflict with all versions of the hadith which bear authentic routes - none of which mention the goat eating the piece of paper.



No comments: