New and shocking footage of British troops torturing Iraqis...

cleanbluesky said:
Is pain worse or 'moraly wrong' compared to jail time? (as far as flogging is concerned, stoning would likely be a death sentance)
Click to expand...

Well I think making somebody physically suffer is less civilised than say jail time, while in jail it gives the individual time to reflect on their crime and maybe get some kind of rehabilitation (in an ideal world) as well as the loss of liberty as a punishment.

A flogging is just a vicious attack on the individual which basically "threatens" them into capitulation, obviously in terms of "death" its very hard to bring somebody back to life if they are found to be innocent or a law changes.

So yes I would say they are very different.

HEADRAT
 
Last edited:
vonhelmet said:
I need proof that I think something now?

Argh! It's the thought police!

*jumps out window*
Click to expand...

You don't *need* proof, no. You are free to believe that god is watching you every minute of the day and taking note of what you do, just as people are free to believe in father Christmas or the tooth fairy. There is no law against having irrational beliefs with no evidence to support their existence.
 
HEADRAT said:
Well I think making somebody physically suffer is less civilised than say jail time, while in jail it gives the individual time to reflect on their crime and maybe get some kind of rehabilitation (in an ideal world) as well as the loss of liberty as a punishment.

A flogging is just a vicious attack on the individual which basically "threatens" them into capitulation, obviously in terms of "death" its very hard to bring somebody back to life if they are found to be innocent or a law changes.
Click to expand...

And why is one morally 'wrong' and the other less so? Is it not because that is what society has lead us to believe - just like @if's society has lead him to believe that stoning homosexuals is okay.

A physical punishment might be quicker, yet more likely to leave physcial problems or scars...

I wonder whether either are effective?
 
cleanbluesky said:
And why is one morally 'wrong' and the other less so? Is it not because that is what society has lead us to believe - just like @if's society has lead him to believe that stoning homosexuals is okay.
Click to expand...

His society is our society isn't it? I believe he lives in the UK and was even born here?? If so then his society does not believe that murdering gays is okay.
 
cleanbluesky said:
I didn't ask you to prove that you thought something, I asked you to prove that your opinion was in touch with reality
Click to expand...

I know, I know. You may have noticed that my post was not entirely serious, and I figure yours was in the same vein given the smiley. The point being, we have discussed proof/faith for hours on end and never reached a conclusion so it would be pointless to start yet another threadjack about it here.

Let's just leave it that I believe in something that you lot don't. It's not exactly relevant to... what thread is this again? It's so hard to tell when they all turn into religious flamefests.
 
Way off topic now but regarding homosexuality, here's a few facts about England:

1846 .......... more death sentences handed down for homosexual acts than for murder.
1861 .......... Death sentence now commuted to 10yrs to life
1895 .......... Oscar Wilde receives 2yrs hard labour.
1955 .......... 1065 men imprisoned for homosexual offences.
1967 .......... no longer an offence in if in private between consenting adults.


So, maybe it's just a matter of time for the islamic world to catch up.
 
vonhelmet said:
Let's just leave it that I believe in something that you lot don't. It's not exactly relevant to... what thread is this again? It's so hard to tell when they all turn into religious flamefests.
Click to expand...

Since when was asking you why you believe something a flame attempt?
 
cleanbluesky said:
Since when was asking you why you believe something a flame attempt?
Click to expand...

Well, maybe not a flame, but you know that it's pretty irrelevant to the discussion, and you also know that it's been discussed over and over and you of all people certainly know that asking anyone for proof of anything is impossible when you often appear to be insisting that it's impossible to prove anything.
 
@if ®afiq said:
I believe it is a grave sin and as such requires a harsh punishment.

Re-read what I said. It is not about consenting adults. Those who are outside of wedlock getting flogged. Those who are in wedlock (i.e married to a women) and comit(sp?) a homosexual act pay the ultimate price.
Click to expand...

Completely sickening. Looks like Nick Griffin was right what he said about Islam :mad:

Bet if I said all aisans should be beaten or killed just because they are aisan you'd be the 1st one to call me a racist. Same sick prejeudice different group :mad:
 
Last edited:
singist said:
So, maybe it's just a matter of time for the islamic world to catch up.
Click to expand...
But the quran is the "Word of God" so cannot be changed, nothing new can be learned. Morality is a fixed construct based on 7 - 9th century Arab ethics.
 
Last edited:
Sleepy said:
But the quran is the "Word of God" so cannot be changed, nothing new can be learned. Morality is a fixed construct based on 7 - 9th century Arab ethics.
Click to expand...

Unless the original interpretation of it was wrong. Though I'm not sure such "liberties" are allowed in Islam.
 
The point I was originally illustrating was this:

How can someone scream blue murder about a few lads getting a pasting for lobbing rocks and explosives around when that person also feels that stoning a gay who commits gay acts is acceptable punishment.

It is a complete double standard and it is my firm belief that many of the posters points of view stem from a belief that if a muslim does something then it is OK but if a westerner does something it is bad.

This is why the attrocities committed by the Taliban were dismissed as being "harshm but brought stability". Yet these soldiers are being condemned so strongly by the same person who shrugs off Taliban cruelty and death sentences for gays.

There is NO consistency in those opinions unless a significant and overwhelming bias is at the front of them, a bias against non muslims and the west. Furthermore such opinions are supposedly moderate for a muslim.
 
VIRII said:
It is a complete double standard and it is my firm belief that many of the posters points of view stem from a belief that if a muslim does something then it is OK but if a westerner does something it is bad.
Click to expand...

I wonder whether this is often the case myself. The Islamic world has some terribly unstable practices yet as long as it is Muslim on Muslim violence or opression then it gets marginalised or dismissed... or it gets blamed on Jews. i.e. Palestinians strap bombs to kids, its obviously the fault of Jewish opressors for making them do such a thing. Suicide bombers kill Iraqi kids to get to a lone soldier, and they are apparently fighting for the freedom of the Iraqi people...

But then again, aren't Saudi Arabia also victims of Islamic terrorism occaisionally?
 
Last edited:
vonhelmet said:
Unless the original interpretation of it was wrong.
Click to expand...
The text is pretty unambiguous, it would be difficult to reinterpret it to mean anything other than homosexuality is verbotten.
Though I'm not sure such "liberties" are allowed in Islam.
Click to expand...
Sort of if there is latltude within the text itself or if Muhammeds own life allows for latitude.

Islam is not the monolithic belief it likes to present to the outside world. Different interpretations abound.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom