Stoning...absolutely disgusting
- Thread starter londonbairn
- Start date
I suspect it will. If Iran is still publicly executing criminals, it stands to reason that crime is still being committed on a regular basis.
Bear in mind also that under Iranian law, citizens are allowed to perpetrate acts which would be considered illegal under Western law.
For example:
- Iran has no money-laundering laws (because this is not considered a crime)
- Iran has the highest population in the world using opiates (because opium has been traditionally acceptable in Iranian society, considered a luxury of the aged and infirm but now widely consumed by young people)
- Iran is a key transshipment point for Southwest Asian heroin to Europe (because she makes little or no attempt to prevent it)
- Iran's treatment of women ranks among the world's worst (because women are considered second-class citizens, and abuse of women is part of the culture)
- A women is raped and murdered every six days in Tehran alone (largely for the reasons given above)
- Iran's torture of political prisoners ranks among the world's worst (because she doesn't care about human rights, so the torture and murder of detainees is perfectly legal)
- Iran's restriction of free speech ranks among the world's worst (because free speech is a result of free thought, which constitutes a threat to the regime)
- Iran has no laws against honour killing (because this is part of the culture)
- Iran's political and financial corruption ranks among the world's worst (because this is part of the culture; it is also one of the methods by which the current regime remains in power)
So you see, it's not as simple as you assume. Iran's strict laws do not guarantee a lower crime rate, since (a) the Iranian legal system permits atrocities which we would consider crimes, (b) the Iranian legal system is inconsistently, and unfairly applied, and (c) the Iranian legal system is fraught with corruption.
What's the point of a so-called "strict legal system" if you allow things like the torture and murder of political prisoners? What's the point of a socalled "strict legal system" if you allow honour killings?
What's the point of a so-called "strict legal system" if corruption is endemic and there are no laws against money-laundering? What's the point of a so-called "strict legal system" if misogyny is part of the culture and women are routinely abused because there are few laws to protect them?
We can start with the UN Declaration of Human Rights and work our way up from there. Seriously, you must be trolling. You can't possibly believe what you're saying.
Iran...
(a) executes homosexuals
(b) restricts free speech
(c) maintains illegal detention centres in which dissidents are tortured (sometimes until they die)
(d) claims democracy but regularly bars candidates from elections (particularly if they are pro-reformist)
(e) permits execution by stoning
(f) punishes offenders with public flogging
To name just a few key features of Iranian society.
Yet you say our way is no better than theirs? Yeah, right. I bet I know which one you'd prefer to live in.
I'm sure I saw Abu Hamza working in Next as a coat hanger
Associate
- Joined
- 6 Jul 2008
- Posts
- 1,841
Eh, so I got my dates/regimes a little wrong. No one's perfect. No need to resort to cookie-cutter personal insults.
Last edited:
We can start with the UN Declaration of Human Rights and work our way up from there. Seriously, you must be trolling. You can't possibly believe what you're saying.
Iran...
(a) executes homosexuals
(b) restricts free speech
(c) maintains illegal detention centres in which dissidents are tortured (sometimes until they die)
(d) claims democracy but regularly bars candidates from elections (particularly if they are pro-reformist)
(e) permits execution by stoning
(f) punishes offenders with public flogging
To name just a few key features of Iranian society.
Yet you say our way is no better than theirs? Yeah, right. I bet I know which one you'd prefer to live in.
Thanks Evangelion for being the voice of reason in this thread
From someone who can't help but troll, and always posts with anger, that's pretty smart to call me a troll.We can start with the UN Declaration of Human Rights and work our way up from there. Seriously, you must be trolling. You can't possibly believe what you're saying.
Iran...
(a) executes homosexuals
(b) restricts free speech
(c) maintains illegal detention centres in which dissidents are tortured (sometimes until they die)
(d) claims democracy but regularly bars candidates from elections (particularly if they are pro-reformist)
(e) permits execution by stoning
(f) punishes offenders with public flogging
To name just a few key features of Iranian society.
Yet you say our way is no better than theirs? Yeah, right. I bet I know which one you'd prefer to live in.
My point is that it's their country, their laws, their way of life. None of our business. Capiche?
So you think that foreign intervention in say Zimbabwaye (not sure on spelling) is a waste of time? You think we should just watch people suffer when we have the power to help?
Suffer? How are they suffering? That is their LEGAL system!
I dont see anyone helping in Zimbabwaye do you....?
No financial benefit thats why!
I havent seen anyone do anything about the human rights in North Korea but no one seems to mention that do they.......because its not a muslim state i wonder....
"Foreign intervention" has been really good in the past few years hasnt it. Is Iraq or Afghanistan a better place now?
We can start with the UN Declaration of Human Rights and work our way up from there. Seriously, you must be trolling. You can't possibly believe what you're saying.
Iran...
(a) executes homosexuals
(b) restricts free speech
(c) maintains illegal detention centres in which dissidents are tortured (sometimes until they die)
(d) claims democracy but regularly bars candidates from elections (particularly if they are pro-reformist)
(e) permits execution by stoning
(f) punishes offenders with public flogging
To name just a few key features of Iranian society.
Yet you say our way is no better than theirs? Yeah, right. I bet I know which one you'd prefer to live in.
Now, if every post in an argumentative thread was like that then they'd actually be a pleasure to take part in. Well done you.
This is why I love reading Evangelions posts, in here and in speaker's corner. Even if I disagree, they're thoroughly articulated, backed up with lots of evidence, and presented nicely with clear/listed points.
I wish I could post like him.
Baseless accusations: the first resort of a man without an argument. Shall we move on?
Well, that wasn't your point to begin with. Your original point was "On who's authority is our way better?" I have since addressed that point, identified the relevant authority, and explained why our way is better.
Now you want to change the subject; you want to talk about whether or not it is any of our business. That's another issue entirely, and completely irrelevant to the question of whose legal system is morally superior.
The answer is simple: it is very much part of our business, for the following reasons:
(a) Iran voted in favour of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights when it was first proposed, and is honour-bound to uphold that standard by virtue of her vote and her participation in the UN; indeed, an Iranian delegate was originally responsible for finalising the UDHR (a fact which now seems painfully ironic). This makes Iran's legal system and human rights abuses very much "our business", as indeed it is the business of every other UN member.
(b) Iran is one of the UK's most significant trading partners, and since human rights are often linked to trade, her laws and human rights abuses are "our business" for that reason. The same is true of our diplomatic relations with Iran.
(c) The UK frequently accepts Iranian refugees fleeing the religious and political persecution suffered by so many people in Iran; this makes Iran's laws and human rights abuses "our business" in a very poignant sense, because our international obligations do not allow us to turn away genuine refugees or return them to a nation in which they might face persecution or death. We can't just tell them "Well, your country's laws are none of our business, so you'll just have to go home".
Even if Iran's laws and human rights abuses weren't any of our business, this does not preclude us from criticising them or arguing that "our way is better" (which it so obviously is).
Again, I suggest that you would prefer to live in the UK rather than Iran. And I suggest that is because you know perfectly well that our way is better, no matter what you might say in this thread.
It is definitely our business, and to ignore it is nothing less than cowardice or moral blindness.
The state of affairs in the UK looks a million times better than the state of affairs in Iran.
PS. Thanks to the people who've posted encouraging comments.
Last edited:
hmm..
http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12129668&postcount=47
and just for brevity's sake, that is my first reply in this thread.
and I put it to you that the moment anyone starts interfering in *our* business, you'd be screaming blue murder, like you do re: EU.
He never suggested interfering in their affairs, he was criticising them and is right to do so in my opinion.
Are you being deliberately ignorant because you worship the same sky pixie as these nutters or are you just trolling?
None of our business - why isn't it? They are still humans aren't they?
These are pretty backwards people as far as human rights are concerned - I think the rest of the world has every right (and indeed a duty) to kick up a fuss about this sort of stuff.