|
|
|
Go  |
Post |
Find |
Notify |
|
Reply |
|
Admin |
New PM! |
Platinum
Enthusiast
|
Hadhrat Abbas (R.A) narrates that Rasulallah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wassallam) has said, "Islam will spread far and wide, across the seas. Horses will cross the land and seas in the cause of Jihaad. Then a time will come wherein a group of people will emerge which recites the Quraan. They will claim, 'We have recited the Quraan and is there anyone who understands the Quraan better than us? There is NO ONE more proficient than us in the study of the Quraan.' Then Rasulallah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wassallam) asked the Sahaba, "Do you see any good in their claims?" The Sahaba replied, "No". Rasulallah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wassallam) said, "But these conceited claimants will be from my Ummah and will be the fuel of the Fire." http://www.islam.tc/prophecies/qiyaam2.htmlI am in Pakistan now and i have already had a few fights/discussions with some women who are actually with the point of view of MMA. Pakistan a counttry with a litracy rate of 30 to 40% only. What good does education do when the literate act the same way as illiterate. Many , well say most that i have met are anti amendments to the current state of law. This is nothing but ignorance. There is only one solution, kill them all till they shut up. The sooner any dictattor realises that, the better for Pakistan. I have no problem wih a dictator, but he should be a good and intelligent dictator. VV by the time you end up reading Quran , you would proberbly be more proficient in Islam then most clerics. If you find any basis with their current claims, you are free to bash islam. |
| |
| Posts: 1655 | Location: pakistan | Registered: 04-10-05 | |
|
Platinum
Enthusiast
|
Before anyone gets alarmed with the term 'iihad' in the above saying: Jihad means to struggle to strive (for islam). Jihad meaning 'the holy war' is used very rarely it at all. http://www.irshad.org/islam/iiie/iiie_18.htmOne can check out the claims above by seeing the normally used translations. |
| |
| Posts: 1655 | Location: pakistan | Registered: 04-10-05 | |
|
|
|
quote: Originally posted by bik74:
Yeah that is a little old incident and one of the few that gout publicised.
First let me assure you that this is got ntohing to do with Islam.
Certainly a handy excuse - it's not in the Quran, so Muslims must not do it. Definitely convenient.
The boy did not get punished because the people had an evil eye on the women. So the law 'an eye for any eye' has been twisted.
And to think we bought into 'Muslim nations are breeding grounds for insanity' lie that Whitie told us.
As far as Muhktar Mai is concerned i believe that people responsible for those actions are in hiding.
The law for rape..... is SHAME FOR ALL PAKISTANIS AND ALL MUSLIMS.
Its a law where i think Allah should wipe all the Pakistanis out from earth.
A muslim, expounding the death of an entire nation of people for the actions of the few?? You don't hear that too often.
It was introduced at the time of former presidnt Zia Ul Haq. And since then we all have kept a blind eye to it. We are morally dead.
Morally dead. Did I word that or did he? Who got to the truth first?
Only recently Musharraf took a stand and was able to change this absurd law. Many muslim scholars and the govt supported this change. Who isnt supporting this change.....? MMA the relegious bloc in the parilment. All they they have is a slogan with no backing of anything from Quran. Their interpreation does not differntiate between rape and adultary. How can a raped woman bring 4 witneeses ?
Oh if only more men had been around. What's the ratio again? One woman is 1/4th as competent to stand trial as a man? If only more men had witnessed the incident take place. We all know what a hindrance breasts can be where justice is involved.
Yeah its looks absurd and unbelievable but this law has been there for 20 years , even when Benazir (a women) was a prime minister. You think the country has gone to dogs on account of issues like 'stem cells' while think countries like Pakistan are with pigs (talking about MMA).
Its the western style and pressure that such people arent wiped out by a dictator. Qazi Hussain Ahmed is a murtid, a fitna and an ignorant bas---d. He is a reality made strong by the govt itself for political reason.
They are the ones that dont think to reason about which the prophet said this :
When did women become worth something in Islam? Last I checked, Muhammed had a harem, several wives, AND pedophilic relationships. . . it almost seems that, in adapting the ways of the 'Prophet' to this instance, the woman was expendable because, let's be honest, the average Muslim man can just get another wife. Or better yet, just stick a footnote in the Hadith somewhere that that particular woman had it coming. After all, when the pretty voices talk to you, you can make all the rules you want. So yes - a terrible tragedy indeed. Super sad. And yet, I have a feeling that tomorrow, the same thing is going to happen and AGAIN, someone's going to announce from the local minaret that 'this has nothing to do with the teachings of the Prophet' |
| |
| Posts: 1 | Location: USA | Registered: 04-19-07 | |
|
Platinum
Enthusiast
|
Discussions with a knowledgeable and skeptic person is always informative and challenging. Discussion with an ignorant opinionated bigot is always impossible. All the above coming from a person whose country’s record in rape is exemplary. http://sa.rochester.edu/masa/stats.phpRape is a serious problem in the United States today. The United States has the highest rape rate among countries which report such statistics. It is 4 times higher than that of Germany, 13 times higher than that of England and 20 times higher than that of Japan. Only 16% of rapes and sexual assaults are reported to the police (Rape in America: A Report to the Nation. 1992). In 1995 there were 97,460 rapes reported to law enforcement officials. At a 16% reporting rate, this means that there were actually closer to 649,733 rapes in the United States. _______________________________________ Nearly half a million estimate rapes in one year..... at that rate 15 million estimated rapes in 30 years. One can basically conclude that nearly 5% of US population has been raped. The part missed out by statistics is who are the rapists? If one assummes that every person raped only once, then in worse case scenario, we have 5% of US population who are rapist. _---------------------------------- http://www.speakout.org.za/events/stats/stats_Usa.htmlRecent statistics show that rape is prevalent in America, a woman is raped every 2 minutes, according to the U.S. Department of Justice. In 1996, 307,000 women were the victim of rape, attempted rape or sexual assault. [National Crime Victimization Survey. Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, 1997.]Between 1995 and 1996, more than 670,000 women were the victim of rape, attempted rape or sexual assault. [National Crime Victimization Survey. Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, 1997. ___________________________________ Lets blame Islam for all this. |
| |
| Posts: 1655 | Location: pakistan | Registered: 04-10-05 | |
|
Platinum
Enthusiast
|
quote: Originally posted by babthrower:
(s) -- if you are guided by the wisdom of the Koran. Women witnesses don't count.
Not wisdom of the Quran NOT EVEN hadith. Just the wisdom of the mullahs my dear granny. |
| |
| Posts: 1655 | Location: pakistan | Registered: 04-10-05 | |
|
Diamond
Enthusiast
|
quote: It is up to religion to catch up or die.
Religions tend to be notoriously hearty institutions. Granted, some do die, but often because they have been overtaken by others. Ironically, it is the religions which have adapted more to modern times that are suffering most, losing members (mainline Protestantism, for example). While those which espouse Bronze Age ideas are actually growing. |
| |
| Posts: 7678 | Location: On Vacation | Registered: 06-06-02 | |
|
Site
Administrator
|
Bik, your (and/or the University of Rochester's Men Against Sexual Assault organization's) statistics are most likely wrong, as is the interpretation. Using the line of reasoning that, since 1 million people are raped every two years, 5% of the population has been raped simple doesn't make sense. Extend that "reasoning" out and you eventually come to the "inescapable" conclusion that 100% of the population has been raped. Six years after that point, 101% of the population has been raped, following that line of reasoning. ( I have little idea as to what percentage of the US population has been raped, and it would not surprise me to find that the figure is higher than 5%, if all were known. However, the method that the University of Rochester's Men Against Sexual Assault organization used just doesn't work.) From that mistaken statistic, the site comes to the conclusion that 5% of the population are rapists. Again, in 36 years, that line of reasoning indicates that 101% of the population are rapists. (At that point, we have everyone, their brother, and some imaginary people as both rapists and victims of rape.) Below from Lisak D.; Miller PM; Department of Psychology, University of Massachusetts, Boston Pooling data from four samples in which 1,882 men were assessed for acts of interpersonal violence, we report on 120 men whose self-reported acts met legal definitions of rape or attempted rape, but who were never prosecuted by criminal justice authorities. A majority of these undetected rapists were repeat rapists, and a majority also committed other acts of interpersonal violence. The repeat rapists averaged 5.8 rapes each. The 120 rapists were responsible for 1,225 separate acts of interpersonal violence, including rape, battery, and child physical and sexual abuse. These findings mirror those from studies of incarcerated sex offenders (Abel, Becker, Mittelman, Cunningham-Rathner, Rouleau, & Murphy, 1987; Weinrott and Saylor, 1991), indicating high rates of both repeat rape and multiple types of offending. Implications for the investigation and prosecution of this so-called "hidden" rape are discussed. That many rapists are repeat offenders has been noted in quite possible every study of rapists. somehow, your source omits what the overwhelming majority of the medical and law enforcement communities accept. This site show a recidivism rate among rapists at 19% with 3 years after release from prison. Then we have the following: Although the number of serial rapists appears to be low, these offenders account for a very large number of victims. In one study of forty-one serial rapists, the collective sample of offenders was responsible for 837 rapes, over 400 attempted rapes, and over 5,000 "nuisance" sex offenses (Hazelwood, Reboussin, and Warren).These figures do not indicate the definition of rape used for United States statistics; in fact, more than one study had very broad definitions of rape.* Do not take this post as saying that the US does not have a rape crisis; it does. But to in any way compare it to what I have read about rape in several other countries is to ignore reality. *"Have you ever had sex when you didn't want to have sex?" seems to me to include those that had sex simply because it was easier then arguing about not having it.(I hope this comes across as I mean it to. I think anyone who has ever been married understands it.) *************************************************** I'd like to take this opportunity to remind all members of AnswerPool's rules concerning conduct. {i}We hope that ideas will be expressed, exchanged, debated and discussed in depth; diversity of opinion is a good thing and we encourage it. However, disagreements must remain courteous. Personal attacks, 'Flame Wars', and/or name-calling have no place here and are not acceptable as a means of expression.
By the same token, "hate speech" is not acceptable. This would include, but is not limited to, racism, sexism, and other attacks on groups based on religion, sexuality, disability, or nationality. We especially ask that debates about religious issues be kept respectful.{/i} |
| |
| Posts: 17504 | Location: Lincoln Place, Granite City, IL, USA | Registered: 06-03-02 | |
|
Diamond
Enthusiast
|
Fred says, "It was a rule of common law that an allegation of rape or any other sexual offence required corroboration and that the complainant woman's word alone was not enough..."
Well that's still the case in democratic societies, Fred, and so it should be. It should be in all accusations: theft, assault, arson, murder, rape, shoplifting...
But when something is codified, such as that the testimony of one person is discounted or disallowed on the basis that the person belongs to a certain class or subset, and on that basis alone, then supporting evidence must be considered: fingerprints, DNA evidence, surveillance camera evidence, and so forth.
But not when it comes to evidence of rape of a girl or woman.
Here is the advice given to men:
"And such of your women who are guilty of any flagrant impropriety - call to witness four of you against them; and if they bear witness, then confine them to the houses until death overtakes them or ALLAH opens for them some other way."
4:015 Translation by Sher Ali.
And no provision for any other evidence.
User-friendly to gang rapists or rapes by occupying forces? Sure. With god's blessing.
The only thing that's astonishing is that under such a system any people whatsoever are convicted of rape.
______________
By the way, the subtle alternative, "... until ALLAH opens for them some other way..." is often interpreted by devout fundamentalists as "that her relatives kill her " (honor killing) or that she end her disgraced life by suicide.
Charming.
|
| |
| Posts: 6553 | Location: British Columbia, Canada | Registered: 06-11-02 | |
|
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
. It was a rule of common law that an allegation of rape or any other sexual offence required corroboration and that the complainant woman's word alone was not enough 
So that crime stood as one of the few instances where corroboration was required. In practice this requirement was gradually watered down but, in Britain, it was not finally ended until 1995.
. Compare Britain where only 6 to 10 per cent, depending on which poll you take, are regular attenders.That may explain it ! Or is it that they are of the opinion that the common law still rules over there so they won't get convicted? 