Adultery
-
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
-
Peace
242 does not mention 4 witnesses.
244 does not mention zina.
Normally, to convict someone to be guilty of any crime in a court of law guilt should be proven with conclusive evidence and beyond reasonable doubt. In the Quranic system/law it should be the same and maybe we can include "without a shadow of doubt". Otherwise justice is not carried out.
The Quran says in 244 that someone charging a woman of illegal sex should produce 4 witnesses. This is only to qualify the charge and does not mean the witnesses are readily accepted and the woman convicted of zina and the punishment carried out. Correctly she has the right to defense and the benefit of the doubt is on her. In 242 the 4 witnesses are not the conclusive evidence to prove guilt.They are only to qualify the charge and also to get the accuser off from being punished for slandering; which effectively ends or reduces false charges against innocent women.
The verse 242 does not mention that 4 witnesses are necessary to convict someone as a zani or a zania. The requirement to qualify the charge can not and should not be misunderstood exclusively as public sex or pornography.
Samia "zaani" has the pattern for "doer", a pattern used in Arabic for professionals. "kaatib" is someone whose profession is "writing" or "book-keeping".
I believe zina is indicating the repeat offender and the prostitute; male and female. No doubt public sex and pornography should include as well. All these categories are easier to prove with proper evidence and possibly many witnesses.
The other connection we can possibly make is the Azaab mentioned in 248 with the Azaab mentioned in 242.
-
Hi Angel, All,
(..two cents worth!)
I think BEATING people is forbidden except in self defense.
53
Verily He has forbidden upon you The Death and bloodshed and to revile/vilify with pride and to do opposite to Allah or in accordance with other then Allah? strangling, BEATING, repulsing/ repelling, corruption and that (you) devour by obscenity or lewdness, except that/ what is legal to you and what lawful/ clean / pure by labor/ toil and that you seek knowledge of your fate by divining arrows that is sin this day have given up all hope those who disbelieved of your religion so do not you fear them but fear Me?
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=12407.msg100513#msg100513
So my view anyway this lashing business is totally forbidden.
And with respects if you see a girl and a boy may be a relative even having it off-then don?t bother stating that to anybody or be prepared for the eighty lashes - as I see the Ayah below.
Waallatheena yarmoona almuhsanatithumma lam ya/too bi-arbaAAati shuhadaa faijlidoohumthamaneena jaldatan wala taqbaloo lahum shahadatanabadan waola-ika humu alfasiqoona
And those who launch a charge against chaste women, and produce not four witnesses (to support their allegations),- flog them with eighty stripes; and reject their evidence ever after for such men are wicked transgressors;-
Allah Bless.
-
Peace simple,
i just don't get you here
I think BEATING people is forbidden except in self defense.
and then
or be prepared for the eighty lashes - as I see the Ayah below.
do you consider the 80 lashes as self-defense (ok, i know u don't) or do you not consider 80 lashes as a beating (as of in the course of justice ?) ?
please explain your thought .
Salaams, lk
-
Peace simple,
i just don't get you here
and then
do you consider the 80 lashes as self-defense (ok, i know u don't) or do you not consider 80 lashes as a beating (as of in the course of justice ?) ?please explain your thought .
Salaams, lk
Sorry Elke,
I was actually ridiculing the previous translation - to me there is no such thing as the 80 lashes,
peace
Salaams. -
Salaam all
Why is everyone so eager to find "evidence" that X and Y are having sex? How does this offend you or harm you, or even the society, if they are doing it in private? Leave people alone, that's God domain. And He says if you accuse them without having four witnesses you will be punished!
The only person who may get hurt is the spouse, and God has accommodated this case
And those who are happy with the DNA, even this may not work. Go and read about chimera cases.
-
Salaams All,
i am just stunned at people who think sex with people you are not married to is allowed , unless witnessed by 4 people and only then can they be prosecuted - may be i have missunderstood this, i hope i have.
God Bless All.
-
Salaams All,
i am just stunned at people who think sex with people you are not married to is allowed , unless witnessed by 4 people and only then can they be prosecuted - may be i have missunderstood this, i hope i have.
God Bless All.
No one said it is allowed. We say it is unpunishable without the sole evidence decided by God. Many things are not allowed, but not punishable, even with evidence. What's the punishment for not believing in God? What's the punishment for eating pork, even in public? What's the punishment for usuary (and I am talking about punishment set by God)?..etc...etc
-
Peace
Why is everyone so eager to find "evidence" that X and Y are having sex?
I do not think one is supposed to be eager to accuse. It seems clear to me that accusations are a serious charge, for the husband or wife against his/her spouse, or the community against some couple. In a society upholding the system of God I think if people are found to engage in public sexual relations and are not spouses then there is a need to enforce punishment.
Joe
-
Peace bro Warner,
Your reply seems reasonable but what about masochistics who commit zina ? Won't they derive pleasure from the inflicted pain ? How would the painful lashes deter them ? There seems to be a lot of them nowadays.
Also how would you define the upper limit of the force used according to al-qur'aan ? According to your theory, the mullah will always be able to kill someone with violent lashing using full force and then justify that by saying that he did not let compassion move him ! Then he would say that if he had used even a little less than full force that might be cassified as compassion.
-
Peace all,
Corporal Punishment - Effectiveness
Advocates of corporal punishment argue that it is more likely than any alternative to prevent offenders from committing further criminal acts, and that it is also an exceptionally strong deterrent to potential offenders. These claims have been subjected to some empirical investigation, especially by the Cadogan Committee, whose research was continued in 1960 by the Home Office Research Unit for ACTO.
Individual deterrence. Part of the research carried out by the Cadogan Committee and ACTO covered 3,023 cases of robbery with violence (virtually the only offense for which corporal punishment was imposed) between 1921 and 1947. Offenders were divided into two groups those previously convicted of serious crimes and those not previously convicted. In both categories, offenders who were not flogged showed slightly better subsequent records. Those who were flogged seemed slightly more likely to be convicted again of robbery with violence, although the numbers were small and the differences not statistically significant (Cadogan Committee; Advisory Council on the Treatment of Offenders). These findings suggested that flogging was not especially effective as an individual deterrent, but they were not conclusive the groups of those flogged and not flogged were not properly matched, nor were the sentences randomly assigned, for some judges habitually made more use of the penalty than others.
General deterrence. The Cadogan Committee devoted special attention to five cases of corporal punishment used as an exemplary sentence in response to major outbreaks of crimes for which, according to public opinion, the penalty was particularly suitable. The committee found that in some cases the facts plainly contradicted such beliefs and that reductions in crime could just as plausibly be attributed to causes other than the penalties imposed on offenders. It also noted that the incidence of robbery with violence in England and Wales had declined steadily in the years before World War I notwithstanding infrequent and decreasing use of corporal punishment, whereas in the postwar years it had tended to increase despite a much greater and increasing resort to floggings. It was also shown that between 1890 and 1934 the incidence of robbery in England and Wales (where corporal punishment might have served as a deterrent) declined more slowly than in Scotland, where corporal punishment was not inflicted for those offenses (Cadogan Committee).
ACTO also compared the incidence of robbery with violence in England and Wales before and after corporal punishment was abolished as a judicial penalty in 1948. The number of robberies reported to the police increased steadily during and after World War II, although corporal punishment was employed more frequently than before the war. After 1948, however, there was a marked downward trend, and until 1957 instances of robbery remained well below the 1948 level. The causes of this reduction were unknown, but ACTO inferred that corporal punishment had not been a strong deterrent immediately before its abolition and noted that abolition was not followed by an increase in the offenses for which it had previously been imposed (Advisory Council on the Treatment of Offenders). In short, no evidence proved that corporal punishment provided more deterrence than imprisonment, to which it commonly served as an alternative penalty before abolition. Canadian and New Zealand studies confirmed these findings (Canada, Parliament; New Zealand Department of Justice).
Reference
http//law.jrank.org/pages/739/Corporal-Punishment-Effectiveness.html
-
Peace all,
"The victim was tied to a post or on a triangle of wood and stripped, receiving the specified number of strokes on the back. A sentence of 100 or 120 lashes was equivalent to a death sentence; but few lived to receive so many. Even twenty lashes could maim; with the specially extended Great Knout twenty blows could kill.
The executioner was usually a criminal who had to pass through a probation and regular training, being let off his own penalties in return for his services. Peter the Great is traditionally accused of knouting his son Alexis to death, and there is little doubt that he was actually beaten till he died, whoever was the executioner."
Reference
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knout
-
The professor explained that he carried out a study and found that grasshoppers have ears in their legs ,which he is going to prove ;
"I have trained this grasshopper to jump when I say 'jump'." The professor demonstrates this a few times.
Then the professor cuts off the grasshoppers legs.
"See. Now I say 'jump' and the grasshopper no longer responds. So it is obvious the grasshopper has ears in its legs".
siki