Misunderstanders of Islam pass law mandating stoning for adultery

http://indonesia.usaid.gov/en/Program.5.aspx

So was there some huge jump in adultery in Aceh? I mean, don't officials usually create laws in response to problems detrimentally affecting society? Or are they simply following in the United States' latest footsteps and adding more and more restrictions to the average citizen's life for the fun of it?

Will there be a special out clause for Imams, visiting Saudi princes and perhaps men in general? Maybe they could add hanging, drawing and quartering to their list of entertainment for the masses, if it isn't considered too kuffirish.

Again, I maintain that one of the benefits to Islamic government's (an oxymoron of oxymorons) tendency to (over the long stretch of history) turn their countries into wastelands is the continual supply of more and more stones.

Aceh: where discerning perverts go to have sex with little girls and boys... under the protection of Islam.

Relax, all you Islamophobes, Anjem Choudhary is here to explain away all your irrational fears about Sharia.

It is so much better than any alternative way of life that you have to be mad to argue.
Convinced? No? well you will be after seeing this performance, because Anjem has learned how to modulate his voice like a reasonable, statesmanlike politician instead of a gibbering fanatic.

It makes such a difference, watch and learn:

http://www.islam4uk.com/current-affairs/uk-news/46-uk/350-anjem-choudary-addresses-the-english-defence-league

Bob Dylan and the Black Crows had it right as far as the Mullahs and Imams are concerned.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtMPlY3duz4

They'll stone you when you're trying to be so good (Christians)
They'll stone you just like they said they would (Fatwahs)
They'll stone you when you're trying to go home (Buddists in Thailand on motorcycles)
They'll stone you when you're there all alone (solitary in jail)
But I would not feel so all alone
Everybody must get stoned (Mullah and Imam's chorus)

They'll stone you when you're walking on the street (dressed inappropriately)
They'll stone you when you're trying to keep your seat (Infidels and people of the book)
They'll stone you when your walking on the floor (take your shoes off in the Mosque)
They'll stone you when your walking to the door (Women should stay in the house, if hubby calls and you aren't home, well you must get stoned)
But I would not feel so all alone
Everybody must get stoned (Mullah and Imam's chorus)

They'll stone you when you're at the breakfast table (if you used the cup reserved for Islamic guests)
They'll stone you when you are young and able (don't have coffee with anyone of the opposite sex in Saudi Arabia)
They'll stone you when you're trying to make a buck (selling music and Valentines)
They'll stone you and then they'll say good luck (maybe not so much)
But I would not feel so all alone
Everybody must get stoned (Mullah and Imam's chorus)

Well They'll stone you and say that it's the end (CAIR says True Sharia has no stoning)
They'll stone you and then they'll come back again (Even with Video on You Tube, true Sharia doesn't stone)
They'll stone you when you're riding in your car (women cant drive)
They'll stone you when you're playing you guitar (no music)
Yes But I would not feel so all alone
Everybody must get stoned (Mullah and Imam's chorus)
Alright

Well They'll stone you when you are all alone (solitary confinement on a some sort of charge)
They'll stone you when you are walking home (morals police for inappropriate dress)
They'll stone you and then say they're all brave (sure)
They'll stone you when you're send down in your grave (the whole point of stoning)
But I would not feel so all alone
Everybody must get stoned (Mullah and Imam's chorus)

"law was passed unanimously by Aceh's regional legislature, said assembly member Bahrom Rasjid..."

It all sounds pretty simple to me. They just want to be allowed to kill more women. This new law serves only the purpose legalize the killing of more women.(Human sacrifice, as someone noted, on another thread.) They want to kill them in public, where every man can pick up a stone and make the "adulteress" bleed--maybe crack her skull (a gratifying sound).

The question now is, will they make their adulteresses wear hoods, to dehumanize them, or will they be able to satisfy themselves that anyone buried to the neck is inhuman?

One thing I'm curious about--maybe Abdullah or Dolly could help me with it--does the circle jerk happen before the stoning, or after it, or both?

"Honest Ibe Hooper and Brave Ahmed Rehab of CAIR, of maybe Salam al-Marayati of MPAC, or perhaps M. Cherif Bassiouni..."

1. These Muslim leaders and scholars take time out of their busy schedules to argue and make allegations against people who report on Islam's deadly sharia penalties.

2. These Muslim leaders and scholars don't actually intervene or argue against those who implement those sharia penalties.

In other words, these Muslim leaders and scholars care more about Islam's public image in the West than they do about human life.

I didn't donate 20 bucks to the tsunami relief effort for this.

I want my money back.

Impossible. Indonesia is the paragon of a moderate Muslim country.

...for hey, the Koran doesn't mandate stoning for adultery!

And indeed, it doesn't. Find out why Muslims still believe that stoning is mandated by Allah in my new book The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran.

There are also other things Muslims feel it necessary to do, or not do, that have no basis in the Koran (e.g., prayer 5 times a day). The answer is simple for why: Muslims do not merely follow and revere the Koran, they also follow and revere the Sunnah (whose heart is the Sayings (Hadiths) of Mohammed). It is, in fact, from the Sunnah where most of Islamic laws are derived.

As Chibli Mallat, a Muslim professor of law put it:

“...none [of the 4 schools of Islamic law] would disagree with the statement attributed to the Syrian jurist Awza’i (died 774 a.d.) that the Book is in greater need of the sunnah than sunnah is of the Book.”

[emphasis added].

-- from “Islamic to Middle Eastern Law a Restatement of the Field (Part I)”, by Chibli Mallat, The American Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. 51, No. 4 (Autumn, 2003), p. 724

Notice what Prof. Mallat is saying that all 4 schools of Islamic law say: Not only is the Sunnah important, not only might it be said it is as important as "the Book" (i.e., the Koran): it is downright more important than the Koran! At any rate, if he is correct -- and I see no reason to doubt his veracity in this regard (particularly cf. his CV) -- the question of whether or not the Sunnah is more important or equally important is beside the point: There should be no question that the Sunnah is sufficiently important to Muslims to explain all the extra-Koranic substance in Islam that is revered by Muslims -- all derived from their reverence of Mohammed.

Take a look at Chibli Mallat's CV -- I think even Hugh might be favorably impressed. I may not be a good judge of this, but this CV seems to me to be genuinely substantive, and not the usual puffed up resume we see in these "Distinguished" Muslim academics.

http://www.mallat.com/articles/principal.htm

hey, the Koran doesn't mandate stoning for adultery!

And indeed, it doesn't.
.................

And, indeed, "pious" Muslims have been concerned about this unfortunate omission since the days of the "rightly-guided" Caliphs:

We have a report from `Umar that he said,

'The Messenger of Allah stoned, Abu Bakr stoned and I have stoned. I am not prepared to add to the Book of Allah [Qur'an] otherwise I would write it into the mushaf, for I fear that there will come some people who, not finding it [stoning mandated in the Qur'an], will not accept it.'
..................

Indeed--Allah forbid that anyone might consider that stoning is not mandated under Shariah!

And this, in "modern", "democratic" Indonesia.

Given that many governments are economizing, this makes perfect sense. After all, ropes eventually stretch and can no longer be reused. Bullets, gas, etc can only be used once and have recurring costs. Stones can be reused and encourage audience participation.
The government should be applauded for cutting costs

Stoning? How barbaric!

Test

With all the nice things about the new JW I sorely miss the feature of the old JW allowing one to move "laterally" across the comments of adjacent threads without having to go first to the home page. Do you plan to install that feature?

And, as Hugh points out at the beginning of the comments of this artle, who, exactly, continues to support them economically?

http://frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=36267

And why, do you think that would be? As a part of some "new" revelation?

http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=16354#comment-58371

Hummmm........

stoning people that's the islamic way of exercising

Aceh? Isn't that the place the allah blessed with a tsunami? This must be pis-lams way of appeasing that mongrel spirit.

And what other religion today than Islam condones stoning for anything? Ah, the inherent inflexible, brittle, always stuck on Plan A (which is invariably a very bad plan) nature of Islam. So tired of Islam. Why isn't everyone?

This would apply to non-Muslims as well? l am assuming it does. where are muslim trolls and appologists on this?
these converts like to talk the talk while living in the West, let Mikhail Abb move to Aceh and lets hear from him a year after. wonder if he would still love being a pious muslim?

lkeevy1, Abdullah Mikail in a long exchange with me (during which he was tap-dancing and I was trying to extract his teeth) he 1) refused to deny that he supports stoning, and he 2) refused to acknowledge that his tacit support of stoning as God's law is in conflict with his professed allegiance to the U.S.A. and to American laws.

"Having had the privilege of spending part of my youth living in Indonesia, I have a very personal appreciation for its cultural richness and extraordinary diversity. The people of Indonesia have shown the world that democracy, Islam and modernity can thrive together. The world has witnessed the tremendous transformation that Indonesia has made over the last decade."

Obama said that a month ago..
They might want to move up the Indonesia trip before the apostate laws come up for review.

Is adultery the opposite of infantry?

If stoning worked there would be no adultery in islamic countries.

How's that working out so far?

Stoning...There's just no sport in it, the way it's done these days. The accused should be allowed to escape if he or she can. Why does it have to be stoning to the death? Isn't driving the "adulteress" out of town sufficient?

And, what about the way they go about it? They don't throw stones from any distance. They walk up to the victim and throw the stone straight down on her head. Why isn't everyone just given a hammer, and allowed to take a whack? The result is the same.

No. Not sporting, at all.

(New Revised Standard version):

Leviticus 20:10
If a man commits adultery with the wife of his neighbor, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall be put to death.

Steven J.,

It's simple. Jews used to do it, but they progressed and stopped doing it about 2,000 years ago. Muslims have not progressed, and many of them still are doing it, or want to do it. In fact, a Muslim scholar writing in the 14th century complained even then that Jews had long since stopped stoning as proof that Jews had corrupted the guidance that Allah had given them!

...“because they disbelieved and killed the prophets unjustly” by reason of their disbelief in miracles, e.g. the splitting of the sea, the clouds giving shade, and the sending of the manna and quails, and splitting of the rock into twelve fountains/or, disbelief in the revealed books, e.g. the Gospel, Qur’an, the verse of stoning, and the Torah verse in which Muhammad is depicted;

-- Baydawi (died circa 1316 a.d.), in his important Qur’anic exegesis of the line from the Koran “because they disbelieved and killed the prophets unjustly” (Koran 2:61) in his work Anwār al-tanīl wa-asrār al-ta’wīl, ed. Fleischer, H. O., 1846—48. Reprint Osnabrück 1968, p. 63. English translation by Michael Schub.

Also, the great Muslim exegete Ibn Kathir:

“The Jews changed the law they had in their Book from Allah on the matter of punishment for adultery, from stoning to death, to a hundred flogs and making the offenders ride a donkey facing the back of the donkey.”

http://tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=5&tid=13875

And our own Muslim troll Abdullah Mikail helpfully referred me to a hadith which shows that Mohammed actually dared some Jews in his time to follow Allah's law of stoning (Ar-Rajm) and those Jews did not want to follow through with the law on stoning, so Mohammed ordered the guilty man and woman to be stoned, and one of the Jews even tried to protect the victims with his own body shielding them from the stones the Muslims threw!

Here are the hadiths in question:

Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar:

The Jews came to Allah's Apostle and told him that a man and a woman from amongst them had committed illegal sexual intercourse. Allah's Apostle said to them, "What do you find in the Torah (old Testament) about the legal punishment of Ar-Rajm (stoning)?" They replied, (But) we announce their crime and lash them." Abdullah bin Salam said, "You are telling a lie; Torah contains the order of Rajm." They brought and opened the Torah and one of them solaced his hand on the Verse of Rajm and read the verses preceding and following it. Abdullah bin Salam said to him, "Lift your hand." When he lifted his hand, the Verse of Rajm was written there. They said, "Muhammad has told the truth; the Torah has the Verse of Rajm. The Prophet then gave the order that both of them should be stoned to death. ('Abdullah bin 'Umar said, "I saw the man leaning over the woman to shelter her from the stones." -- Bukhari 4.56.829

And another hadith shows that Muslims from Mohammed forward considered stoning to be a divine law:

Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:

'Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book," and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way." 'Umar added, "Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him." -- Bukhari 8.82.816

So Steven J., which is worse, having a culture that stoned people 2000 years ago but has since stopped, or having a culture that still stones and still considers it a divine law and thus a good and just law, better than merely human laws?

Steven J.,

It's simple. Jews used to do it, but they progressed and stopped doing it about 2,000 years ago.

We seem to adhere to other parts of Leviticus, notably the prohibition on homosexuality.

There is that saying of Jesus "Let he who hath no sin cast the first stone", and as Steve J thinks Islam is so swell, perhaps it is time he and his family got the hell out of the West and took off for a typical Islamic country, like Iran.

As soon as I get my 20 bucks for jury duty I'm buying this book. I'll add it to my collection.

No possibility of nuanced discussion here. Just the same morons bellowing on and on.

Question_Everything,

The West has been progressing and shaking off superstitious nonsense. This process of progress has been going on for the last three centuries, increasing exponentially with each succeeding century. You seem to have the infantile attitude that remains irrationally impatient with the rate of progress actually occurring -- which on many levels has been astounding -- and you want perfection now.

Steven J.,

You say "We seem to adhere to" the prohibitions on homosexuality from Leviticus.

By "We" I assume you mean the modern West. The West ceased to be theocratic well before the 18th century, and since the 16th century to now has been progressing in the direction of secularism, and that progress has been exponential, with each century following accelerating faster than the previous. In a time such as ours, where gay pride parades in every major city are the norm, when a proudly self-proclaimed lesbian (Ellen Degeneres) is invited to host the most prestigious television award show and has her own popular daytime show watched by millions of ordinary suburban housewives (and she is just one example out of thousands one could adduce more or less famous), when nearly every politician is in favor of further enhancing gay rights, when specifically sodomy laws have slowly but surely been eroded by that same progress not only in social attitudes but in legal cases (cf. the Supreme Court decision six years ago Lawrence v. Texas, itself just the latest massive chipping away at those old "blue laws" which in most states of the U.S.A. have become a dead letter anyway) -- for you to claim that the modern West is still following Leviticus is surreal and preposterous. Once again one sees Leftists so obsessed with utopian impatience they cannot see the forest for the trees and they obstinately ignore massive evidence of progress while perversely comparing residual imperfections in the wake of that progress with monumental sins of the distant past. This pathology is directly related to why most Leftists remain Equivalencists with relation to the problem of Islam and cannot thus make any rational distinction among religions, where the one (Islam) is egregiously stupendously worse on many important levels in comparison with all the others.

Hesperado: ...when a proudly self-proclaimed lesbian (Ellen Degeneres) is invited to host the most prestigious television award show and has her own popular daytime show watched by millions of ordinary suburban housewives

Great! We have a lesbian on TV, religion is vanquished!

/sarc

Religion has and always will be the biggest cause of trouble for the world until it is treated like the childish superstition it is. Yes, islam is by far the worst mainstream religion to fight against, but I'd hate to dishonestly say the others are benign just so we can deal with islam first.

Are priests still molesting children?

"Religion has and always will be the biggest cause of trouble for the world until it is treated like the childish superstition it is."

Posted by Question_everything

The absense of religion has its problems too. Remember the USSR communists killing wantonly 60- 100 million people. Remember Pol Pot (definitely not a Christian) wantonly killing 2 million in his very small country. Remember Mao Tse Tung a devout communist wantonly killing 30- 50 million of his own people. When you take religion out of the equation, all you have left is money, power, and control; not a good recipe for peaceful existance. Utopia does not exist in this world and never will. All Utopians from the beginning of time have failed in their efforts. Utopia is only an illusion. Islam is and has been the worlds problem for 1400 years. Christianity and most other religions have been peaceful in modern times. Islam has not and never will be peaceful due to their central belief of superiority over all others. I would suggest that we all must focus on todays world and in todays world Islam is the problem. Other religions are not.

Question_Everything,

Progress means there are still bad things. Perfection means all bad things have vanished. Progress is reality (at least in the West); perfection is fantasy. Stalin, for example, came at least incrementally closer to the latter, but in order to do so he had to eliminate and/or incarcerate impediments to perfection in the form of millions of human beings. I'm afraid that's the only way religion will be eradicated, because the vast majority of people on the planet are not as casually enlightened as you are, and never will be.

"Yes, islam is by far the worst mainstream religion to fight against, but I'd hate to dishonestly say the others are benign just so we can deal with islam first."

No one is asking you to say the others are benign. Just don't use Equivalencist language. When we have a surrounding sociopolitical culture that massively misunderstands the problem of Islam and, among many ways of manifesting that misunderstanding, contextualizes it in Equivalencist terms, then we in the Anti-Islam Movement should calibrate our rhetoric accordingly. If Islam is "by far the worst", then it makes no sense to give rhetorical ammunition to the dominant sociopolitical culture around us who insist that Islam is not by far the worst, who indeed tend to insist that Islam is not even worse in any significant way that should cause concern, who often, in fact, bend the opposite way and accord Islam with praise. Were this just an abstract argument about theology or an aesthetic argument about culture, or just a political argument about the human rights of certain subsets of the population, it would not be that momentous of an issue. But when the one religion in question, Islam, alone among all religions on Earth today is nourishing a fanaticism that leads innumerable members of it in various places around the globe to commit massive violence, often grotesquely ultra-violent reflecting a ghoulish fanaticism (e.g., the Muslim man and wife ready to use the baby formula for their baby as an explosive in order to mass-murder people with the hopes of a more spectacular attack than 911), and we must assume there remain innumerable others assiduously plotting to get their hands on various horrific forms of WMDs to use against us -- then we have gone far beyond a comparison of apples and oranges, and we are talking about deadly matters of public safety.

Atheists and Islam are one in the same ...Oooo, hope I didn't offend anyone. Hey, can you get as good as you give, QE!?