Adultery
-
Peace Warner,
Pornography is taking/making an image or releasing it to the general public? Or making the general public view it while making/taking those images?
Long before there were printed and electronic images, pornography existed. As defined in the great reading, it involves people (it doesn't matter if they are a married couple or not) having public sex.
Some people say nude paintings are not pornography but art. What is your opinion on this?
I think that nudity is not "zina". The proper covering of the body is already covered by other passages and there is no punishment stated in those passages for not doing it. So again it is a moral issue not a legal issue. On the other hand, public sex is "zina" and hence a legal issue.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Salaam Ayman
I have some Questions for you Bro.- Since when is Zina = Public Sex and who defined this ?
- What constitute a Public sex ? ( Does a Spouse catching his/her partner having sex with another constitute a Public Sex ? ) .
- Why do you categorize Adultery/ Infidelity as a Legal Issue ? ( It may be a legal Issue where you are , but not in other Countries . In fact , in many countries Adultery is Strictly a Moral issue only devoid of Legal Implications . Adultery has not been a Ground for Divorce in many Jurisdictions for ages now and anyone can File for divorce On a No fault Basis ) .
- why did you believe that only the Father is responsible for a child born out of a liason and not the Mother ? . ( The Child Support Acts hold both the Father and the Mother of the child responsible for the child's maintenance , although the Responsibilty lies largely with the Non-Custodial Parent ) .
5)Since when does a Pornography recorded by a Couple , married or not for their own Private Viewing , is a Legal Issue ?
Thanking you in advance for your Informed answers
Peace
almarh0m
-
Peace Brook
Thanks for the verse.
As you know , in the Quraan zina is not mentioned many times but Fahishaa is mentioned quite a number of times. Since there is a connection between the two if we understand Fahisha clearly it may be possible to understand zina.
-
Peace bro Warner,
According to your conjecture of "let not compassion/pity move you" meaning that the lashes are not mild, you still have not been able to define the upper limit of the force of lashes according to al-qur'aan. Should it be a little more than mild ? medium ? extremely violent/forceful ? If yes then why and if not then why not ?
Your conjecture allows the interpretation of 242 to mean that one can inflict lashes extremely forcefully/violently enough to kill. If that is what The God wanted, He would have said so, that "kill them by lashes".
If, however, we see what 242 says without using conjecture, then we find that it is clearly telling us not to let compassion move us in God's system (fi deen Allah); and what is God's system for punishment of zina ? It is 100 LASHES IN PUBLIC (which stresses the public shaming/humiliation aspect). Thus clearly, it means not to inflict less than 100 lashes, or not prevent others from witnessing it, and is talking about not letting compassion reduce the number of lashes or prevent the public witnessing.
The fact remains that there is no mention in 242 that lashes should be severe/violent/forceful, so God's system is the number of lashes in public, not severity of lashes, otherwise it will be a license for the mullahs to kill. The purpose of the punishment is public shaming and humiliation as is evident from the second part of 242, and not physical torture.
Do you mean to say that one cannot fall ill or become weak due to sickness after committing zina, before receiving the punishment ? Even if one is not ill, and is perfectly healthy and strong, 100 lashes inflicted extremely forcefully by someone like Hulk Hogan is enough to kill an average person. Why don't you try it sometimes and it will be empirical verification for you.
According to your conjecture, there is nothing in 242 to stop Hulk Hogan like person from inflicting 100 lashes with extreme force on an average person, thereby killing that person in the process.
You still have not answered how public humiliation/shaming cannot be an azaab. Even torture by gentle repetitious dripping of water can be azaab. Imagine yourself standing in public witnessing the lashing of a zaani. You will be the witness of the azaab of the public humiliation of the zaani in front of others, won't you ?
-
Peace bro Khizar,
I have never heard that the fat in a woman's body allows the pain to get absorbed better than that of men. I think it has to do with the sensitivity of the skin. Women's skin is much more delicate than men's in general.
The pain sensing neuron endings are not just present in the skin but the muscles too. Haven't you heard of "myalgias" or "muscle aches and pains" ? The excess fat in certain parts of the female body would "pad" the muscles from the pain causing stimulus; thus in men muscle pain sensors will be stimulated more than in women in certain parts due to lashes.
Any scientific proof of women's skin being more delicate than men's in general ?
Women actually have to deal with delivery of a baby which can be one of the most painful experiences in the world, and thus have better ability to endure pain than men !
-
Peace bro "phoenix",
JK- 1) the Quran doesnt say that there have to be four simultaneous eye witnesses. One could be having sexual relations and witnessed firt by one, then a second, third and then fourth witness separetly and later they may all testify. So its not necessarily public. 2) four witnesses does NOT necessary mean direct eye witnesses of the event but could also be applied to indepenedent witnesses of DNA tests and/or other facts which solidly indicate that the event took place. GOD Bless!
So, according to this, one can be the sole witness if he|she was the one who witnessed them everytime they had sex!
Also, why chase people with DNA tests and expert witnesses because they had sex that nobody witnessed? Who has the right to punish me because I had sex with someone? Only an espouse would be hurt, and there is a specific verse for this case. Punishements, as I said, are to protect the society, not someone. Public sex raises the tolerence threshold towards illegal sex.
-
peace
What I really don't get is why the Quran mentions public sex at all, let alone public gay sex.
I have never ever seen that happen. Never. It is such an uncommon practice. At least in today's world (who knows what those arabs used to do in the good ol' days). And having sex in public is something most people would intuitively avoid.
Is it sex as in sexual intercourse? or just lewd or immodest behavior?You haven't heard of pornography, porn movies, porn theatres? Do you think they are a 20th century invention?
-
Peace warner
I mean if there is a sole witness other than spouse, and he can solemnly affirm , then why doesn't that qualify her/him to be a zani ? why this exception? so i think swearing of spouse , does not make her/him Zani, and hence can not be given the punishment prescribed for "Zaneeis"
peace
siki
That's right. She did not have public sex.
-
phoenix 1
I agree with warner here, we have been careless in using this word public sex. Zina is not public sex, but an unauthorized sexual act , which while being committed is witnessed by 4 people. If a husband and wife are witnessed by 4 people , i don't think they would qualify for 100 lashes.
peace
sikiI do not agree here. A huband and wife committing public sex will be equally punished. The punishment is not for illegal sex, but for public sex. What if two "zani" get married? Can they go on with their public sex without being punished?
"zaani" has the pattern for "doer", a pattern used in Arabic for professionals. "kaatib" is someone whose profession is "writing" or "book-keeping".
Sorry for the consecutive replies (I do not like that), but I lost the thread for sometime and then forgot about it!!
-
Peace Tanveer
Thanks for providing the answer. The command is to cane one hundred times. Not one less or more. On one part the Quraan says do not move with compassion so as to reduce it below 100. At the same time Quraan does not command to give a back rub. Caning is a punishment to hurt someone physically with the intention of making the guilty person feel the pain. Public shaming is not the purpose; inflicting pain is. If there is no pain, few less than 100 or more will not matter to the person carrying out the punishment. If it is just a tap from the cane without pain then why should the person doing the caning feel compassion and do it a lesser number of times. If the intention is to kill or maim, The Quraan would have mentioned it. To go beyond what is expected from a punishment of caning is transgressing the limits. The Quraan does not have to give detailed description of each and every command. When the Children of Israel were commanded to sacrifice the cow, the details were not given, it was expected that they had sufficient intelligence to figure that out. I did not know that X Men are in to the caning. I agree with you their caning will be quite a show.
Also if you subscribe to the porno theory public witnessing may even be not considered as azaab it maybe even a distraction.
I agree it will be humiliating that others witnessing the punishment. But the verse says that some believers should witnesses the azaab and the verse does not say for the believers to be the azaab itself. When the quraan mentions azaab in other places does the Quran mention public humiliation and water treatment?
-
Peace Tanveer
Thanks for providing the answer. The command is to cane one hundred times. Not one less or more. On one part the Quraan says do not move with compassion so as to reduce it below 100. At the same time Quraan does not command to give a back rub. Caning is a punishment to hurt someone physically with the intention of making the guilty person feel the pain. Public shaming is not the purpose; inflicting pain is. If there is no pain, few less than 100 or more will not matter to the person carrying out the punishment. If it is just a tap from the cane without pain then why should the person doing the caning feel compassion and do it a lesser number of times. If the intention is to kill or maim, The Quraan would have mentioned it. To go beyond what is expected from a punishment of caning is transgressing the limits. The Quraan does not have to give detailed description of each and every command. When the Children of Israel were commanded to sacrifice the cow, the details were not given, it was expected that they had sufficient intelligence to figure that out. I did not know that X Men are in to the caning. I agree with you their caning will be quite a show.
Also if you subscribe to the porno theory public witnessing may even be not considered as azaab it maybe even a distraction.
I agree it will be humiliating that others witnessing the punishment. But the verse says that some believers should witnesses the azaab and the verse does not say for the believers to be the azaab itself. When the quraan mentions azaab in other places does the Quran mention public humiliation and water treatment?
An appropriate logic, i was about to post the same answer.
siki