Absent as ever, of course, is any recognition of these punishments' origins in the Qur'an and in Muhammad's own example, though in this case that is as much the fault of the reporting as the apparent omissions in the statement from Human Right's Watch. "New Indonesia stoning law is 'torture': rights group," from Agence France-Presse, October 12:
JAKARTA -- A new law mandating death by stoning for adulterers in Indonesia's deeply Islamic Aceh province advocates "torture" and should be overturned, US-based group Human Rights Watch said Monday.
"Stoning and flogging constitute torture in any circumstances," Human Rights Watch Asia head Elaine Pearson said in a statement.
Stoning, according to Bukhari 8.82.16: "'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."
"Imposing these draconian punishments on private, consensual conduct means the government can dictate people's intimate lives."
That's Sharia for you. Even proponents of Islamic law will note that it is comprehensive, and prescribes proper conduct for every aspect of life. For that matter, theocratic systems do not lend themselves to limitations on power.
The law -- which also allows punishments of up to 400 lashes for child rape, 100 lashes for homosexual acts and 60 lashes for gambling -- was passed unanimously last month by lawmakers in the staunchly Islamic region.
It has yet to be approved by the provincial governor and is opposed by the central government in Jakarta.
The law, based on local interpretations of Islamic or sharia law, is supposed to replace elements of Indonesia's criminal code.
It allows the death penalty for a married person and 100 lashes for an unmarried person found guilty of adultery.
Qur'an 24:2 (emphasis added): "The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication,- flog each of them with a hundred stripes: Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day: and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment."
Human Rights Watch urged the central government and a new incoming local parliament in Aceh to overturn the law.
A foreign ministry spokesman, Teuku Faizasyah, told AFP the law would not come into effect without the approval of Aceh Governor Irwandi Yusuf, who has stated his opposition to the law.
"Even if local government approves it, if the central government thinks it's not in line with national law, the central government can ask it to overturn or annul the law," he said,
"The central government wants to make it clear that the law and legislation at the provincial level should not in any way contradict the law and legislation promulgated at the national level."
Here's the kicker:
Aceh had previously adopted a milder form of sharia law in 2001 as part of an autonomy package from Jakarta aimed at quelling separatist sentiment.
Aceh thus demonstrates once again that any Sharia is a slippery slope toward more Sharia, for just as the system does not lend itself to limitations on power, a code of conduct that is supposed to be divinely ordained does not lend itself to compartmentalization. Accordingly, the proponents of Islamic law, including those threatening or waging jihad to impose it, will not be satisfied with just a little Sharia.
Nearly 90 percent of Indonesia's 234 million people are Muslim, but the country also has significant Hindu, Buddhist, Christian and Confucian minorities. Most local Muslims practise a moderate form of the religion.
There's that obligatory article of faith -- if it's only a Tiny Minority of Extremists, we can all more or less relax, right?
"Aceh had previously adopted a milder form of sharia law in 2001 as part of an autonomy package from Jakarta aimed at quelling separatist sentiment."
There is no such thing as a milder form of Shar'ia law or "Shar'ia light" as some Muslims refer to it...sooner or later all forms of Shar'ia resort back to the original primitive and violent form that is so popular in the most violent of Islamic dominated areas...
Anyone who tries to sell you that milder form of Shar'ia law or of any claimed milder form of Shar'ia law is simply lying to you...
"Most local Muslims practise a moderate form of the religion."
In other words, they're not practising Islam but deviate from what Islam and Sharia law truly is.
Stone age laws in the 21st century. It beggars belief. How soon before muslims attempt to pass these same laws in Europe?
http://www.loonwatch.com/2009/10/michael-kruse-the-life-rifqa-bary-ran-away-from/
Anyone who advocates sharia law for America, is advocating treason.
tanstaafl,
Obama's chief adviser has just come out saying that sharia law is misunderstood in the US.
http://ibloga.blogspot.com/2009/10/obama-advisor-on-muslim-affairs-women.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/6274387/Obama-adviser-says-Sharia-Law-is-misunderstood.html
Stand up to traitors America. The time is now, or never.
Mobamad
The law -- which also allows punishments of up to 400 lashes for child rape, 100 lashes for homosexual acts and 60 lashes for gambling...
But lashes and death by stoning for adulterers is called for...Adultery then is a worse crime against Allah than child rape...even though the adultery is by consent, and the child rape is child rape...I guess Allah loves child rapists more than he loves adulterers...
Oh, those "misunderstanders" of Islam! They seem to be everywhere!
Certainly this kind of use of capital punishment is deplorable and to be opposed. But it seems there's some lack of detail in this posting.
For starters, the true historic origins of subjecting adulterers to stoning comes from Judaism, as even the Islamic theological narrative, as I understand it, says it was initially revealed to Moses/Musa prior to more formal Sharia codification under Muhammed. JW has tried to do a nice old sashay dance in claiming that stoning is not featured in Judaism any more, though in fact it is an eternally available normative punishment under halacha and would be in any true, future halachic state.
Also, Marisol, your continued claim that theocratic systems of civil authority do not lend themselves to limitations and compartmentalization is untrue. If we review Pope Pius XII's Ci Riesce address in 1953, he outlines the prudential, discretionary parameters for allowing non-Catholic practices and anti-Catholic errors within which the rulers of a Catholic theocratic state can act in consonance with their theocratic obligations to the Social Reign of Christ. It would seem that some degree, at least, of this should be portable to Islam.
fairuzfan: For starters, the true historic origins of subjecting adulterers to stoning comes from Judaism
If that's the case, so what? When was the last time Jews stoned anyone?
It would be like saying "The French invented the guillotine so the aQ animals cutting off heads have a right to do so."
Such skewed logic. Evolve already!
Aside from the fact that the origins rest with Judaism, Question_Everything, is the fact that it still remains a normative option and practice in Orthodox halachic Judiasm. It has not been an available option for about the last 1,900 years solely because there has not been an authoritative and competent juridical authority to make use of it. Standard Judaic belief is that a Torah state will return at some point in the future, where such punishment options will be allowable.
By the way, any idea when was the last time somebody got stoned in a licit juridical manner in Aceh?
Thank you for your condemnation. Please link us to the mainstream Islamic blogs and newspapers, where you condemn these practices. Whew! I'm so encouraged about the uprising of Muslims who are dissatisfied with the way these fundamentalist kooks are interpreting the Q'uran!!!
Can't wait!
PS: What did your imam say when you told him what you think? He must agree with you, right?
Memo to winoceros: I'm not an adherent of Islam. But since I am an adherent of Catholicism, how about sharing with me your views of Ci Riesce?
Clearly Human Rights Watch is guilty of a "hate crime" against Islam. There needs to be a full investigation at the U.N., perhaps deportation of those involved to Jordan, Egypt, or Pakistan so they can face the full penalty of international Law, it isn't "free speech" to yell fire in a crowded theater. *sarc off*
fairuzfan: As soon as Jews anywhere start agitating to implement stoning as punishment, I'll be right there with you condemning and mocking it.
In the meantime, while we both wait patiently for that day to arrive, let's focus our finite resources on where it's happening now and not be distracted by pointless hypotheticals.
From post above...Standard Judaic belief is that a Torah state will return at some point in the future, where such punishment options will be allowable.
In that case a Nobel Peace Prize is in order...It's not what you are doing today that counts...It's what you 'might' do in the future...The last recipient set the standard...We are still waiting for him to 'do' something...
fairuzfan: ...it still remains a normative option and practice in Orthodox halachic Judiasm.....
The word 'practice' would suggest its use, which we both know is a lie.
fairuzfan: By the way, any idea when was the last time somebody got stoned in a licit juridical manner in Aceh?
Just a matter of time.
Catholic, eh? Can't you just be honest enough to say 'superstitious', fairuzfan, and leave it at that?
"Certainly this kind of use of capital punishment is deplorable and to be opposed. But it seems there's some lack of detail in this posting.
For starters, the true historic origins of subjecting adulterers to stoning comes from Judaism, as even the Islamic theological narrative, as I understand it, says it was initially revealed to Moses/Musa prior to more formal Sharia codification under Muhammed. JW has tried to do a nice old sashay dance in claiming that stoning is not featured in Judaism any more, though in fact it is an eternally available normative punishment under halacha and would be in any true, future halachic state.
Also, Marisol, your continued claim that theocratic systems of civil authority do not lend themselves to limitations and compartmentalization is untrue. If we review Pope Pius XII's Ci Riesce address in 1953, he outlines the prudential, discretionary parameters for allowing non-Catholic practices and anti-Catholic errors within which the rulers of a Catholic theocratic state can act in consonance with their theocratic obligations to the Social Reign of Christ. It would seem that some degree, at least, of this should be portable to Islam..."
AND STUPIDITY ORIGINATED WITH ISLAM..(that much is true)
You are not an expert on anything remotely of importance,
let alone Judaism. Stoning originated with pagan Arab
tribes in the Middle-East and Indo-Europeans in South Asia and was incorporated into Islamic Law in the 7th Century
directly from pre-Islamic pagan practices in global regions where Islam took hold. You are a bloody idiot.
IT PATENTLY DOES NOT AND NEVER DID ORIGINATE WITH JUDAISM.
Judaism does not condone stoning AT ALL. Israelite and
other tribes that engaged in stoning behaviour were ethnic
Semites in Israel and Judea who had not yet become Monotheistic Jews (I doubt you have held a Jewish Bible or a Torah so you are a clearly an ignoramus) and were engaging
in pre-Judaic pagan practices.
What Muhammad did do, is steal Halachic Law from the Jewish tribes in Yathrib (present-day Medina), Arabia and pervert those Laws to meaninglessness.
I am afraid you are the one doing the Sashay Dance which
seems to be all-too-prevalent among cross-dressing Muslims
(e.g., Qaddafi, Nasrallah, etc.) and please refrain from
further comment, while funny in the extreme, it is a waist
of space on Jihad Watch.
The Majapahit Empire that ruled from Malaya to Indonesia
in the 15-16th Century was such a wonderful tolerant
Hindu-Buddhist Kingdom. The best thing Indonesia and Malaysia could do for themselves is to DUMP ISLAM and return
to their Hindu-Buddhist roots.
"fairuzfan" wrote:
For starters, the true historic origins of subjecting adulterers to stoning comes from Judaism...in fact it is an eternally available normative punishment under halacha and would be in any true, future halachic state.
...............
And yet, oddly, even the most "conservative" of Israeli Jews seem somehow remiss in not calling for the reinstatement of stoning as a modern penalty--I suppose they despair of Israel ever being a true halachic state. sarc/off
It seems the Jews of Muhammad's day--in violent, primitive, dark ages Arabia--were already too civilized to carry out stoning. This, from the Hadith:
A Jew and a Jewess were brought to Allah’s Apostle on a charge of committing illegal sexual intercourse. The Prophet asked them. “What is the legal punishment in your Torah?” They replied, “Our priests have innovated the punishment of blackening their faces with charcoal and shaming them.” Abdullah bin Salam said, “O Allah’s Apostle, tell them to bring the Torah.” The Torah was brought, and then one of the Jews put his hand over the Divine Verse of the Stoning and started reading what preceded and what followed it. Ibn Salam said, “Lift up your hand.” Behold! The Divine Verse of the Stoning was under his hand. So Allah’s Apostle ordered that the two be stoned to death, and so they were stoned. Ibn ‘Umar added: So both of them were stoned at the Balat and I saw the Jew sheltering the Jewess from the stones. [Bukhari 8:82:809]
I consider the final lines of this Hadith the most moving passage I have found in all the Islamic texts I have read--and the lines refer not to the glory of Islam, but to its *victims*.
Of course, Muslims read this Hadith as an indication of the weakness and dishonesty of Jews--I read it as an indication of their humanity and growing sense of decency.
As to your claim that stoning was a Jewish invention, that is not how Muslims see it. They consider Musa (Moses) to have been Muslim, and the horror of stoning to have come straight from Allah.
"The Divine Verse of the Stoning was under his hand. So Allah’s Apostle ordered that the two be stoned to death, and so they were stoned. Ibn ‘Umar added: So both of them were stoned at the Balat and I saw the Jew sheltering the Jewess from the stones" [Bukhari 8:82:809]
ONLY A MUSLIM WOULD BELIEVE THAT GOD ('ALLAH') SANCTIONS
STONING (AS I SAID IN MY POSTING ABOVE BUT IN DIFFERENT
WORDS). NO OTHER MONOTHEISTIC OR PRESENT-DAY POLYTHEISTIC BELIEF SYSTEM SANCTIONS STONING. NONE.....
MAYANS, AZTECS, PRE-ARYAN CENTRAL ASIAN RELIGIONS,
MIDDLE-EAST PAGAN RELIGIONS ALL UNDERTOOK STONING.
EVENTUALLY, THESE CULTURES DIED OFF OR WERE REPLACED
WITH OTHER BELIEF SYSTEMS. TODAY, ONLY ISLAM SANCTIONS SUCH BARBARITY.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8302018.stm
"Miss Aceh" dared to compete for "Miss Indonesia" without being confined to a burka!
What will she wear in the swimsuit contest? Young people these days!
while i do not think that stoneing or any other punishment should be allowed for what a couple married or not does in Private married or not is anyone elses bissiness but the lovers and their mates who if they did not consent can file for divorce i do wounder if flogging or canning might not be a better more effective punishment for minor crimes or for dui fines and jail time does not seem to work for those who drink and drive
Thank you for your condemnation. Please link us to the mainstream Islamic blogs and newspapers, where you condemn these practices. Whew! I'm so encouraged about the uprising of Muslims who are dissatisfied with the way these fundamentalist kooks are interpreting the Q'uran!!!
Can't wait!
PS: What did your imam say when you told him what you think? He must agree with you, right?
Fine, you're not a Muslim. Now, please link us to the mainstream Islamic blogs and newspapers, where you condemn these practices.
I should have figured out a Muslime couldn't be a fan of Fairuz. No singing or uncovered women in Islam.
Your silly moral equivalencies are laughable.
And I don't know who Ci Riesce is, and you know why? Because he isn't killing anyone these days, and no one cites him as the example of the perfect man while they slay infidels.