Adultery
-
Depends on "lewdness".
Of course, in a state which has a Quranic constitution, people will be punishable for the specific acts mentioned in the Quran.
004.015
YUSUFALI 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.
PICKTHAL 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).
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.004.016
YUSUFALI If two men among you are guilty of lewdness, punish them both. If they repent and amend, Leave them alone; for Allah is Oft-returning, Most Merciful.
PICKTHAL And as for the two of you who are guilty thereof, punish them both. And if they repent and improve, then let them be. Lo! Allah is ever relenting, Merciful.
SHAKIR And as for the two who are guilty of indecency from among you, give them both a punishment; then if they repent and amend, turn aside from them; surely Allah is Oft-returning (to mercy), the Merciful.What does "lewdness" mean here?
-
And are we seriously going to expect them not to murder? Steal? Commit adultery?
You forget that the verses of law in the Quran have very little to do with religion and very much to do with... law.
-
Look around and you'll find why. I don't think such a thing is explicitly banned in the Quran. People must cover up and not reveal their private regions to random people, that is one explicit law. Another is that zina, punishable by 100 lashes, will ALWAYS be committed here. Now consider that pornography combines those two things, that is harmful, most assuredly.
The Western world is on its way down soon, as a result of being overly liberal. I hear they (in some places) want child molesters to have a daily dosage of "child porn" to prevent them from striking again. As you know, when one of these things is implemented in one place, it spreads like wildfire over time.
Now, if that's not sickening and a pointer as to why liberalism is horrid, then I don't know what is.
-
most people in the West are not that sick, they will not allow a kiddy fiddler to get his "daily dosage" of child pornography.
What is wrong with porn?
A) Do you understand the machine that is "liberalism"? It continually pushes for more, and more, and more liberalism. Nobody likes "conservatism", but they will mindlessly choose to do X or Y to satisfy group Z, in this case, bending over backwards for child molesters. As society "progresses", this gets progressively more "liberal", and we end up with paedophilia accepted generally. Remember homosexuality? People had your view back in the 50s.
B) Didn't I just say? It a) breaches sexual privacy and b) ALWAYS involves the act of zina
-
a) breaches sexual privacy and b) ALWAYS involves the act of zina
a) obviously such people do not value privacy
b) so in a Quranic state we would have to stop the non-Muslims fornicating?
BTW there is a whole world of difference between child molestation and things like homosexuality and porn.
-
a) Tough shit for them. Looks like they're going to have to stand up, be civilised and be productive members of sosciety instead of upholding their carnal desires. Oh, now that is a sincerely horrible thought.
b) Yes, of course, with 4 witnesses.
c) No. On a progressively liberal timescale, there is no such distinction.
-
a) Tough s*** for them. Looks like they're going to have to stand up, be civilised and be productive members of sosciety instead of upholding their carnal desires. Oh, now that is a sincerely horrible thought.
yea it is for them, so why can't we just leave them to it?
c) No. On a progressively liberal timescale, there is no such distinction.
I can assure you that the overwhelming majority of people do see the distinction.
-
A) Did you not read? It's time civilisation progressed beyond such retardation, and if Islam is going to herald this, more power to such people.
B) Just like 50 years ago, homosexuality was an abomination.
-
So what?
What's so "disgusting" about a man and a boy making love?
Appeal from emotion.
-
I must say that those who dont know the distinction between homosexuality and paedophilia worry me somewhat...
One of the differences is CONSENT,and some others are EXPLOITATION and MANIPULATION...
ps; whats the difference between promiscuity and legalising four wives? -
I must say that those who dont know the distinction between homosexuality and paedophilia worry me somewhat...
One of the differences is CONSENT,and some others are EXPLOITATION and MANIPULATION...
ps; whats the difference between promiscuity and legalising four wives?Oh, you think CONSENT and EXPLOITATION and MANIPULATION have not been thought of?
How about a consenting 14 year old kid and a consenting 55 year old adult, with parental approval?
As for the final, promiscuity entails sexual relationship with a large number of completely different partners over a period of time. Having "four wives" (which is hardly the norm) is barely scraping the surface of "promiscuity".
-
The example you cited involves manipulation and exploitation....This is where society and its laws step in even when superficial 'consent' seems to have been given.....
Is promiscuity bad or is a little promiscuity alright? And four or more than one at a time is better than many partners one at a time? -
Alright, how about man-boy love with full parental consent, and just for you, without exploitation, manipulation, and so on?
Is promiscuity bad or is a little promiscuity alright? And four or more than one at a time is better than many partners one at a time?
A) Promiscuity is not an ideal situation.
B) Neither are ideal situations. 43, 4129, emphasis on the latter.
C) Keep note of 4129. But I will say, it depends what you do with those "many partners at one time".
How dare you people oppress so cruelly those at http//www.nambla.org/.
-
Even with full parental consent it is impossible for there to be no exploitation/manipulation in the eyes of society at large.....Children do not have the capacity to deal with relationships,even if misguided parents and paedophiles think so....
Legalising/justifying something does not make it correct,and if its based on less than ideal situations why do you stop at four?