In the face of so much international scrutiny and condemnation, Iran has a decision to make: Stoning for adultery while married is enshrined in Islamic law (see here for why it doesn't matter that it's not in the Qur'an), but is it too bad for Iran's image to actually carry out in this case? On the other hand, the regime has its legitimacy as an Islamic government to uphold among the likes of the cleric Mesbah Yadzi, who says there is no room for democracy, freedom, or human rights in the Islamic Republic.
Here, Iran can: 1.) hold off for now, and hope the world's collective attention span runs out, 2.) go ahead with stoning or another form of execution, or 3.) try to save face by suddenly deciding that, upon further review, the case is to be fully or partially dismissed, and issue some form of reprieve on the sentence.
For the moment, it looks like Iran is leaning toward the third option, even if only to buy time. "Iran: Woman's stoning sentence on hold," from CNN, September 8:
Tehran, Iran (CNN) -- Iran has put the stoning sentence of a woman convicted of adultery and murder "on hold," Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast told state-run Press TV on Wednesday.
While the statement did not differ greatly from previous, sometimes contradictory reports from the Iranian government about the fate of the woman, Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, it did indicate continued attention to the murder aspect of her case.
"The sentencing of Ms. Ashtiani for adultery has been stopped and (her case) is being reviewed again, and her sentencing for complicity in murder is in process," Mehmanparast said....
this is one time that the international community came to help.
m
What Iran does or deosn't do is none of your business.
Iran's moral priorities:
Genocide against Infidels using nuclear weapons is good, but adultery is a capital crime punishable by stoning.
It's what happens when you combine Stone Age ethics with Space Age technology.
There are large posters with the face of Sakinah all over Italy, and especially in Rome, in some of the major piazzas; there have been many demonstrations, too, in France. Far more attention is being paid to this case in both France and Italy, and in other parts of Western Europe, than in this country. One should ask the reasons why.
I lived in Saudi and so have some experience of Arab behavior. They are experts in building up hopes and then dashing them at any moment.
I expect that this innocent women will be murdered by the Islamic State because she was found guilty in an Islamic court which reaches decisions according to the savage precepts of Shari'a law.
To let her go, or in any way ameliorate her sentence would be equivalent to diluting Shari'a. That's something the Mullocracy would never allow. Shari'a and its savagery is the basis for their power.
They won't give an inch on that.
@ Islamic Empire
Human rights are universal, so it *is* our business whether an Islamic country decides to carry out the savage murder of an innocent woman.
thank you for your input.
Islamic Empire dictates:
-- What Iran does or deosn't [sic] do is none of your business.--
Islemp, deciding what is or isn't our "business" is well above your pay grade. Buzz off, Caliph.
RSI
don't bother with guy. he is just here to agitate
This is a right time to organize a campaign for the HUMAN RIGHTS of Christians in Iran. It is not just this poor woman. There are hundreds of cases where Christian and other minorities are tortured.
P.S. It is a sad fact that the US Army burned the Bibles in Afghan base that were sent as gifts. But just asking here; if the U.S. Military seized a stack full of Korans, would they be burned?
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/05/bibles-destroye.html
Miriam, you called that one right! The people who were able to put enough pressure on Iran to do this deserve a great deal of appreciation.
So "Miriam" which is it?
1) Thanking "islamic Empire" "thank you for your input." & encouraging him to "participate" which in this case means provoke?
or
2) As you said to "RedStateINfidel" "don't bother with guy. he is just here to agitate"
Which is it "Miriam"?
Even as the civilized world looks aghast at what has befallen this unfortunate Iranian woman, who may well be killed by being stoned to death, no one seems to realize that all proponents of Sharia, including the "moderate," "bridge building," Imam Rauf, would necessarily support such a sentence for adultery. Why has no one asked Rauf and other leading putative Muslim moderates how they stand on this issue? When will journalists begin to ask Rauf and company the hard questions that need to be raised? Islam entails the embrace of Sharia, and acceptance that the prescribed sentence for adultery is, in fact, death by stoning. I wait in vain for Rauf's ugly, primitive beliefs to be properly exposed by the right questions, which no journalist or politician seems willing or able to ask