Islamic Justice: girl lashed for being raped; rapist pardoned

[.lava]

Originally Posted by Autodidact

IIRC you said that umm, that Westerners are attacking Islam and trying to prevent Muslims from practicing it, didn't you? And I asked where is that happening?

sorry, that's not what i tried to say. it is Chinese who prevent Muslims from practicing salaats...etc. not Western. i was refering to what Western governments do inside Muslim nations. they are not preventing us practicing Islam though


.

[cottage]

Originally Posted by Riverwolf

Considering the subject matter, I think I have every right to be sensitive.

You give the overwhelming impression that your sensibilities have a greater prominence than any sympathy for the woman or outrage at the injustice of this incident.

Originally Posted by Riverwolf

I'm not saying that at all. I'm arguing against the use of the words "Islamic justice" to describe this.

But the facts are, no matter how you deny it, that justice (albeit a perverse form) was dispensed in the name of Islam.

Originally Posted by Riverwolf

It appears there's a cultural miscommunication here. A reaction that one raised in a certain culture expected was not given, because that culture reacts to such accusations in a different way.

I'm not sure what you're saying here, but it sounds like a special plea.

Originally Posted by Riverwolf

I agree. I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing against the use of the phrase "Islamic justice" in this sense.

Yes, because you consider that you personally are being victimised for your beliefs by association. You are not. The only victim was woman who was raped. Can you not bring yourself to condemn the way she was treated?

Originally Posted by Riverwolf

I again say that my sensitivity on this matter is justified. Poor wording can cause even the soundest of arguments to collapse

It wasn’t poor wording. It described what happened: justice meted out by an Islamic court.
I’m sorry but you are too easily offended.

Originally Posted by Riverwolf

Do you think my analogy is correct or not? You have thus far failed to show how it is not.

What analogy? (!)

[Riverwolf]

Originally Posted by cottage

You give the overwhelming impression that your sensibilities have a greater prominence than any sympathy for the woman or outrage at the injustice of this incident.

So? When you realize how often this kind of thing happens in the world, and when you realize that sympathy and outrage for something you have absolutely NO control over is a waste of time, you learn to refocus your energies.

Believe me: I'm just as horrified as the rest of you. However, I try to not let it control my wording: I'll focus it elsewhere.

But the facts are, no matter how you deny it, that justice (albeit a perverse form) was dispensed in the name of Islam.

I'm not denying that. However, that's not what I read. I read: "This is what happens in Islamic courts."

I'm not sure what you're saying here, but it sounds like a special plea.

Why are Muslims expected to try to disassociate themselves with these people?

Yes, because you consider that you personally are being victimised for your beliefs by association. You are not. The only victim was woman who was raped. Can you not bring yourself to condemn the way she was treated?

No, I'm not thinking I'm being victimized for my beliefs by association, because I'm not Muslim. You may want to take a closer look at the "religion" label underneath my username.

What's the point of condemning something I can't control? I can be emotionally affected by an injustice, disagree with it, but not overtly condemn it.

It wasn’t poor wording. It described what happened: justice meted out by an Islamic court.

I’m sorry but you are too easily offended.

I'm actually not easily offended at all. It was very poor wording, because what I read into it was possible, and I can make a good assumption that all other Muslims saw it, too. So I'm not alone. Maro was also insulted by the use of the phrase.

What analogy? (!)

This:

It's the same as accusing the slave labors carried out by some American-based companies as "American labor."

[Autodidact]

One thing I've been wondering--is there anywhere that Sharia law is dispenses that doesn't discriminate against women?

[kai]

Originally Posted by Autodidact

One thing I've been wondering--is there anywhere that Sharia law is dispenses that doesn't discriminate against women?

There is no where that dispenses real Sharia.

Going back to the OP the legal system in Bangladesh is base on the British legal system there inst even any offical Sharia law in Bangladesh. Like i have been saying all along what happened, happened in a tribal area. Bangladesh has problems big problems.


A number of traditional practices also oppress Bangladeshi women. Many women have been charged with committing "moral" offences before local religious leaders whose views are generally biased against women. The local religious leaders issue a fatwa (ruling) that metes out punishment to women, such as the humiliating and degrading public whipping and stoning. There is no legal sanction for fatwa; it is simply a part of traditional practice.







http://www.hurights.or.jp/asia-pacific/no_32/06.htm


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Bangladesh

[Commoner]

Originally Posted by Autodidact

One thing I've been wondering--is there anywhere that Sharia law is dispenses that doesn't discriminate against women?

How would that be possible? The distinction between different groups (men, women, muslim, non-muslim...) is in the law itself. The only way not to dicscriminate would be not to enforce it.

[Autodidact]

Originally Posted by kai

There is no where that dispenses real Sharia.

*sigh* In that case, I don't need to be concerned with Real Sharia, do I? I'm only concerned about the actual Sharia--y'know, the one that some countries are actually using? So is there any place that is using so-called Sharia that is not sexist and oppressive to women?

[cottage]

Originally Posted by Riverwolf

So? When you realize how often this kind of thing happens in the world, and when you realize that sympathy and outrage for something you have absolutely NO control over is a waste of time, you learn to refocus your energies.

Believe me: I'm just as horrified as the rest of you. However, I try to not let it control my wording: I'll focus it elsewhere.[/quote]

You were very quick to assume the worst of somebody who reported an appalling incident, while failing to condemn the actions themselves, which by any standards are abhorrent.

Originally Posted by Riverwolf

I'm not denying that. However, that's not what I read. I read: "This is what happens in Islamic courts."

Then you misread it, because it said no such thing. It said Islamic Justice: girl lashed for being raped; rapist pardoned All that is states is that it was justice handed down in an Islam Court.

Originally Posted by Riverwolf

Why are Muslims expected to try to disassociate themselves with these people?

Why? (!) Because what happened was unjust and despicable.

Originally Posted by Riverwolf

No, I'm not thinking I'm being victimized for my beliefs by association, because I'm not Muslim. You may want to take a closer look at the "religion" label underneath my username.

The point is that you chose to associate yourself with Muslims and you were (supposedly) offended on their behalf.

Originally Posted by Riverwolf

What's the point of condemning something I can't control? I can be emotionally affected by an injustice, disagree with it, but not overtly condemn it.

And yet you were lightning fast in your condemnation of someone who reported it, as if that were the greater injustice!

Originally Posted by Riverwolf

I'm actually not easily offended at all. It was very poor wording, because what I read into it was possible, and I can make a good assumption that all other Muslims saw it, too. So I'm not alone. Maro was also insulted by the use of the phrase.

You read into it what you wanted to read, and then argued fallaciously from the particular to the general.

This: [/quote]

It wasn’t ‘American labor’ but Americans’ labor. Americans were involved, not the American state. You don’t blame the country of origin for the actions of individuals, unless their actions were state sponsored or evidence of overall national approval.

[Riverwolf]

Originally Posted by cottage

You were very quick to assume the worst of somebody who reported an appalling incident, while failing to condemn the actions themselves, which by any standards are abhorrent.

I'll focus my energies where they can be effective, not where they are useless. I can't help that poor girl, nor can I protest about the injustice. There's literally nothing I, as an individual, can do about it.

Then you misread it, because it said no such thing. It said

Islamic Justice: girl lashed for being raped; rapist pardoned All that is states is that it was justice handed down in an Islam Court.

Justice isn't limited to the court. I'm not talking at all about the OP itself; ONLY the thread title.

Titles need to be extremely clear to EVERYBODY, not just the most educated and people who are best at reading. Some of us are still learning how to skillfully read.

People who would naturally make such assumptions, as myself and other Muslims here have, need to be taken into account.

Perhaps it would have been better to leave Islam or related words out of the title, and simply mention that a girl got raped and the rapist was pardoned: wait for the OP itself to mention that it was an Islamic court, so the situation as far as we know can be made clear quickly.

Why? (!) Because what happened was unjust and despicable.

And why should we assume Muslims here would disagree? My interaction with the Muslims here has given me reason enough to assume they'd agree fully with the rest of us.

The point is that you chose to associate yourself with Muslims and you were (supposedly) offended on their behalf.

I wasn't so much offended as I was pointing out an error in word choice.

And yet you were lightning fast in your condemnation of someone who reported it, as if that were the greater injustice!

I wasn't condemning; I was correcting.

You read into it what you wanted to read, and then argued fallaciously from the particular to the general.

I read what I saw.

It wasn’t ‘American labor’ but Americans’ labor. Americans were involved, not the American state. You don’t blame the country of origin for the actions of individuals, unless their actions were state sponsored or evidence of overall national approval.

And, there, you've demonstrated my entire point. This wasn't "Islamic Justice," but (in)justice dispensed by a court that happened to follow Islam.

[Commoner]

Originally Posted by Riverwolf

This wasn't "Islamic Justice," but (in)justice dispensed by a court that happened to follow Islam.

But the law that was being practiced/enforced is "Islam"(Sharia), it's not incidental at all. What they were doing was in accordance with the law - it was justice from their perspective, it wasn't the case that it just happened to also be true that they were affiliated with Islam.

An American slaver is not a slaver because of his nationality - that is incidental. But a court that follows Sharia law does make the decisions it makes precisely because of Sharia law. It is not that it just happens to also be an Islamic court it is because of it.

But if there were a law in America allowing you to keep slaves, then you could absolutely say that it's "American Slavery" - and you would have every right to criticize it as such without having to worry about offending an American that opposes it. And you should absolutely expect those Americans that opposed it to disassociate themselves from it.

And you're more worried about offending a couple of "Americans" than addressing the actual problem? Bah!