NationStates Jolt Archive

In Islam, homosexuality is among the worst possible sins. For that reason, even the electric chair seems tame when compared to the methods used to put homosexuals to death in Iran.

A convicted homosexual could be stoned to death, drawn and quartered, beheaded, thrown off a cliff, burned alive or cut in two pieces with the remains burned.
If you're a lesbian, you get off slightly better. o_O;


For two men caught engaged in sodomy, the punishment is death. For women convicted of being lesbian, it is 100 lashes.
Just for the record, "quartered" is defined as:

Pull (a person) apart with four horses tied to his extremities, so as to execute him

...ouch. The article (http://www.houstonvoice.com/2004/7-30/view/columns/death.cfm).

If you're a lesbian, you get off slightly better. o_O;



Just for the record, "quartered" is defined as:

Pull (a person) apart with four horses tied to his extremities, so as to execute him

...ouch. The article (http://www.houstonvoice.com/2004/7-30/view/columns/death.cfm).
Occassionally when you're quartered you're disemboweled first. Just like to throw that out.

Quartering sucks.

WOW!! FOr once, the women gets a better deal!

A typical punishment would include being hanged to near death, drawn on a rack and then quartered to finish the transaction. William Wallace (of Braveheart fame) was actually emasculated between the hanging and drawing to add that special touch.

By the way, Sharia law is what Al Qaeda wants the whole world to live by. Kind of puts the whole gay marriage thing into perspective.

By the way, Sharia law is what Al Qaeda wants the whole world to live by. Kind of puts the whole gay marriage thing into perspective.
No thanks. I like my rights!

Well this explains it all ...

" Why Invade Afghanistan ? Or Iraq ? "

" Ah, see, right wing conservative America got sick of Islam copy-cat-ing it, so it beat it up after school ... "

;)

And we're not bombing these fucktards, why?

And we're not bombing these fucktards, why?
Because Dubya wanted to bomb Iraq instead, He got tired of bombing the desert. ;)

And we're not bombing these fucktards, why?
STFU, I have a huge urge to flame you.


I am a Muslim, a follower of Islam.

I am a Democrat.
I am pro-gay rights/marriage.

See my problem with you? And the simple fact that your implying that a whole religon should be destroyed.

STFU, I have a huge urge to flame you.


I am a Muslim, a follower of Islam.

I am a Democrat.
I am pro-gay rights/marriage.

See my problem with you? And the simple fact that your implying that a whole religon should be destroyed.
We don't hold that against you. We just don't like al-Qeada telling us how to live our lives, or any other group of religious fanatics.

If they weren't crazy arabs that would be a good thing.

If they weren't crazy arabs that would be a good thing.
No! They are generally good people, if you ignore the crazy fanatical lunatics we hear about on the news.

Iran is one of few countries that will execute citizens for crimes (including homosexuality one presumes) committed while under the age of 18. The other nations that do that are Nigeria, China and the USA.

Gotta love those human rights.

No! They are generally good people, if you ignore the crazy fanatical lunatics we hear about on the news.
true true

Iran is one of few countries that will execute citizens for crimes (including homosexuality one presumes) committed while under the age of 18. The other nations that do that are Nigeria, China and the USA.

Gotta love those human rights.

Are you saying the US executes homosexuals?

STFU, I have a huge urge to flame you.


I am a Muslim, a follower of Islam.

I am a Democrat.
I am pro-gay rights/marriage.

See my problem with you? And the simple fact that your implying that a whole religon should be destroyed.

When did I say that? If the whole of Islam were destroyed, that takes a former lover of mine with it- then I'll have no excuse not to eat pork. I am aware that, shock, horror, there are Muslims who don't believe in haterising and murderation. I actually came out after talking my feelings through with a Muslim, so it's no exagerration to say, I owe my life to the kind and giving nature of Islam.

But as for fundamentalist fucktards, bomb Tehran, then the Vatican.

Are you saying the US executes homosexuals?
no, he's saying that the U.S. lacks human rights because blah blah blah we kill people. Omigod. I executed a murderer.

When did I say that? If the whole of Islam were destroyed, that takes a former lover of mine with it- then I'll have no excuse not to eat pork. I am aware that, shock, horror, there are Muslims who don't believe in haterising and murderation. I actually came out after talking my feelings through with a Muslim, so it's no exagerration to say, I owe my life to the kind and giving nature of Islam.

But as for fundamentalist fucktards, bomb Tehran, then the Vatican.

apologies, I get extreme....a lot...

no, he's saying that the U.S. lacks human rights because blah blah blah we kill people. Omigod. I executed a murderer.

Ah. He did specifically mention that Iran executed homosexuals and stated that Nigeria, China and the US did the same thing.

Taking it as he probably intended it, drawing parallels between executing murderers and executing homosexuals is a long bow to draw.

Ah. He did specifically mention that Iran executed homosexuals and stated that Nigeria, China and the US did the same thing.

Taking it as he probably intended it, drawing parallels between executing murderers and executing homosexuals is a long bow to draw.
I see what you mean.

*shrug*

let him explain his own words I suppose

apologies, I get extreme....a lot...

No probs, man, we know how many nutcases there are on the net.

Are you saying the US executes homosexuals?

no, but i am sure there are some gays on death row, you know the whole %5 thing. All i was really doing was just a bit of casual thread hijacking and finger pointing at the type of people who are happy to post meaningless drivel propogating negative stereotypes about a culture that they know very little about while completely ignoring their own shortcomings.

Ah. He did specifically mention that Iran executed homosexuals and stated that Nigeria, China and the US did the same thing.

Taking it as he probably intended it, drawing parallels between executing murderers and executing homosexuals is a long bow to draw.

Actually the only thing i think i pointed out was common to all 4 countries is that they execute children. Homosexuality has nothing to do with it.

no, he's saying that the U.S. lacks human rights because blah blah blah we kill people. Omigod. I executed a murderer.

Are you incapable of reading the words "under the age of 18"?

Iran is one of few countries that will execute citizens for crimes (including homosexuality one presumes) committed while under the age of 18. The other nations that do that are Nigeria, China and the USA.

Gotta love those human rights.

*emphasis is mine

Actually, what you stated suggests the US, Nigeria and China execute people under the age of 18 for crimes that include homosexuality.

Are you incapable of reading the words "under the age of 18"?

Are you incapable of seeing the difference between being a murderer and being homosexual?

Are you incapable of seeing the difference between being a murderer and being homosexual?

Why are you asking me?

Why are you asking me?
why'd you ask me if I could read the words "something something under 18?"

I can very well thank you very much.

why'd you ask me if I could read the words "something something under 18?"

I can very well thank you very much.

Well aparently you ignored them then.

Why are you asking me?

Because you commented on someone's post with regards to executing murderers and you seemed to think age was more of an issue than the crime committed.

Because you commented on someone's post with regards to executing murderers and you seemed to think age was more of an issue than the crime committed.

No actually I was under the impression that the poster ignored the "under 18" part and jumped straight to the "homosexuals = murderers" part for some reason.

*emphasis is mine

Actually, what you stated suggests the US, Nigeria and China execute people under the age of 18 for crimes that include homosexuality.

Still think you are struggling with the language a little bit. What i meant was that the US, China, Nigeria and Iran all execute children under the age of 18. I added the bracketed piece about homosexuality purely in reference to Iran and as a small curtesy to the thread starter who probably wasnt intending this to be a debate on the death penalty.

Still think you are struggling with the language a little bit. What i meant was that the US, China, Nigeria and Iran all execute children under the age of 18. I added the bracketed piece about homosexuality purely in reference to Iran and as a small curtesy to the thread starter who probably wasnt intending this to be a debate on the death penalty.

Not struggling with the language. Taken literally what you said was exactly as I have interpreted it.

Not struggling with the language. Taken literally what you said was exactly as I have interpreted it.

well in that case, my deepest apologies for confusing you with my heinous use of brackets.

Congrats on giving me assistence on the whole thread hijack thing though. Just goes to show that we can be friends after all.

No actually I was under the impression that the poster ignored the "under 18" part and jumped straight to the "homosexuals = murderers" part for some reason.

They probably ignored the "under 18" part because it had nothing to do with this topic. The topic is about Islamic law executing homosexuals.
Trotterstan seemed to try and state that the US is just as evil because it executes people under 18 and inferred that homsexuals were also executed in the US although they seem to be now saying thats not what they meant.
Regardless, the point that was being made in the post you have commented on was that the US executes murderers, that is, people who have taken another life. Trying to equate this with executing homosexuals is an extremely long bow to draw regardless of the age of the person being executed.

Can you please shut the fuck up you pedantic sods: Whatever the original may look like to you, the meaning has been made ABUNDANTLY clear since then and I'm sure the original culprit has seen the error of his ways. Now, please, can we get back on topic?

I think we should all just have cake? Alright? :)

well in that case, my deepest apologies for confusing you with my heinous use of brackets.

Congrats on giving me assistence on the whole thread hijack thing though. Just goes to show that we can be friends after all.

Apology accepted! :D

Happy to help. ;)

Can you please shut the fuck up you pedantic sods: Whatever the original may look like to you, the meaning has been made ABUNDANTLY clear since then and I'm sure the original culprit has seen the error of his ways. Now, please, can we get back on topic?

Ok, seeing as you asked so nicely.

Can you please shut the fuck up you pedantic sods: Whatever the original may look like to you, the meaning has been made ABUNDANTLY clear since then and I'm sure the original culprit has seen the error of his ways. Now, please, can we get back on topic?

I will not rest so long as I am still referred to as a culprit

I will not rest so long as I am still referred to as a culprit


:p

The Original culprit: You are Culprit Zero. Your expedient grammar started this, breeding more culprits. If you want to indulge in a little pedanticism, go ahead. But it's spamming up around the topic now.

Anyway, Iran isn't the only country to treat gays like shit. Even in the British Commonwealth we have places like Jamaica punishing it with ten years hard labour- what's that about? You lock a poof up in an all-male prison, give him a rigorous exercise regime, and expect him to be able to abstain? Bizarre. There was a Brazillian resolution I heard about, I'll go and find the site in a minute, that proposed making discrimination based on sexuality an official human rights violation.

The Original culprit: You are Culprit Zero. Your expedient grammar started this, breeding more culprits. If you want to indulge in a little pedanticism, go ahead. But it's spamming up around the topic now.

Anyway, Iran isn't the only country to treat gays like shit. Even in the British Commonwealth we have places like Jamaica punishing it with ten years hard labour- what's that about? You lock a poof up in an all-male prison, give him a rigorous exercise regime, and expect him to be able to abstain? Bizarre. There was a Brazillian resolution I heard about, I'll go and find the site in a minute, that proposed making discrimination based on sexuality an official human rights violation.

Do you think making it a human rights violation will help homosexuals under Islamic law? Nations like Iran ignore most, if not all, human rights recommendations and resolutions so what makes you think they'll take any notice of the latest addition regarding homosexuality?

So are you saying "Oh shut up homosexuals, you have better rights in the USA than other countries", that somehow the US should stoop to the lowest common denominator and not allow basic human rights? You could use the same thing to women during the Women's Rights movement. Oh shut up women, you have better rights than women do in Islamic countries, so don't complain. Do you see that this is illogical?

It then gives us leverage. All right, Iran and sim'lar are always going to ignore the UN- If Sharia Law was imposed by UN Resolution, Iran would go New Age. But it would give scope within the UN to pressure nations violating the Human Rights of homosexuals. Jamaica, for example, will not want to be violating UN resolutions. It's not useless just because it won't sort out the worst cases. It'll give the more accepting nations the little push they need, which will put more pressure on places that don't legalise homosexuality, since their club will decrease in size.

The Original culprit: You are Culprit Zero. Your expedient grammar started this, breeding more culprits. If you want to indulge in a little pedanticism, go ahead. But it's spamming up around the topic now.

Anyway, Iran isn't the only country to treat gays like shit. Even in the British Commonwealth we have places like Jamaica punishing it with ten years hard labour- what's that about? You lock a poof up in an all-male prison, give him a rigorous exercise regime, and expect him to be able to abstain? Bizarre. There was a Brazillian resolution I heard about, I'll go and find the site in a minute, that proposed making discrimination based on sexuality an official human rights violation.

Well pedantism is a hard cross to bear but someone must. I think its your posts getting off topic because this thread was never about gay rights it isactually another 'lets laugh at the ragheads and congratulate ourselves on being so normal' discussion. I think that hijacking it with spam is in the public interest. Furthermore, your use of the term 'original culprit' threatens to bring the Christian element into a debate about whether or not Adam was the original sinner in the garden of eden, that meaning that in fact that I am completely blameless.

So are you saying "Oh shut up homosexuals, you have better rights in the USA than other countries", that somehow the US should stoop to the lowest common denominator and not allow basic human rights? You could use the same thing to women during the Women's Rights movement. Oh shut up women, you have better rights than women do in Islamic countries, so don't complain. Do you see that this is illogical?

No, I am saying that the plight of homosexuals under Islamic law is far worse than those in the west. FACT

Not once did I say anything about denying human rights to homsexuals. What I did say was nations like Iran will IGNORE UN resolutions with regards to human rights legislation for homosexuals the same way they have for almost every other UN motion with regards to human rights.

If you had bothered to read earlier posts I stated that this is why Al Qaeda must be stopped because the sharia law they propose is that that is exercised in Iran.

The only comment I made that could remotely be interpreted the way you have interpreted was when I said that the treatment of homosexuals in Iran put the fight for gay marriage rights in perspective. That did not state either way whether gay marriage is a human rights issue or not. It did provide some perspective to the plight of homosexuals in Iran as opposed to western society.

It then gives us leverage. All right, Iran and sim'lar are always going to ignore the UN- If Sharia Law was imposed by UN Resolution, Iran would go New Age. But it would give scope within the UN to pressure nations violating the Human Rights of homosexuals. Jamaica, for example, will not want to be violating UN resolutions. It's not useless just because it won't sort out the worst cases. It'll give the more accepting nations the little push they need, which will put more pressure on places that don't legalise homosexuality, since their club will decrease in size.

I didn't say it was useless, just that those most in violation will ignore it. Simple.

Well pedantism is a hard cross to bear but someone must. I think its your posts getting off topic because this thread was never about gay rights it isactually another 'lets laugh at the ragheads and congratulate ourselves on being so normal' discussion. I think that hijacking it with spam is in the public interest. Furthermore, your use of the term 'original culprit' threatens to bring the Christian element into a debate about whether or not Adam was the original sinner in the garden of eden, that meaning that in fact that I am completely blameless.

Putting aside who is more pedantic than the other. This thread, as far as I can tell was not another "lets laugh at the ragheads and congratulate ourselves on being so normal" thread. It actually highlighted the reality of Sharia law. something some people continually turn a blind eye to because they do not want to face such a reality.

Understood then. But that is no reason the UN should not attempt to legislate, and enforce the Bill of Rights.

Understood then. But that is no reason the UN should not attempt to legislate, and enforce the Bill of Rights.

It should not enforce the Bill of Rights, that is for the US.

It should provide and ENFORCE international laws that protect human rights. The facts are that the UN is most vigilant in chasing western countries for alleged human rights violations because countries with apalling human rights records will simply ignore them. Sad but true.

I am referring to the UN International Bill of Human Rights...or the proposed one at least. http://www.unhchr.ch/html/intlinst.htm

Well pedantism is a hard cross to bear but someone must.

But not you, otherwise you'd get the joke. Try looking up pedanticism in the dictionary.

The thread had three possible vectors at the begining: bitch about arabs, bitch about gay rights, or spam. The first gets us nowhere and pisses people off for no reason, the second gets us nowhere and pisses people off for a good reason, the third just pisses people off royally. Can we please aim high here and give it the second vector?

As for most ignoring it if they're already in violation, I think you'll find that most countries want to stay away from violating resolutions. Even Libya's been convinced it's in it's best interests, and they know we're not going to blow them up in the near future. It's about being accepted in the international community. Italy will certainly have a hard time maintaining its effective denial of the existence of homosexuals, which is an important first step. Other examples can probably be found.

As for most ignoring it if they're already in violation, I think you'll find that most countries want to stay away from violating resolutions. Even Libya's been convinced it's in it's best interests, and they know we're not going to blow them up in the near future. It's about being accepted in the international community. Italy will certainly have a hard time maintaining its effective denial of the existence of homosexuals, which is an important first step. Other examples can probably be found.

Do you really think they care about being "accepted" into the international community?

So far Human Rights rulings by the UN have done a lot for the plight of people in China, Vietnam, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran.....the list goes on. Why? Because they ignore the UN!

Just for the record, the only point of this topic was to remind people that the western world doesn't have it all that badly. I've seen quite a few people (not exclusively on NationStates) complain about how backwards the USA is in regards to homosexuality, and how badly gays are treated.

It's sort of like reminding the kid that complains about eating vegetables that children in some parts of the world have no food to eat at all. Not meant to suggest that the suffering of homosexuals is unimportant, just that it's good to keep perspective; as bad as things may seem, they could be that much worse.

I am referring to the UN International Bill of Human Rights...or the proposed one at least. http://www.unhchr.ch/html/intlinst.htm

Ah, my apologies.

Such a bill would need to be enforced on all nations for it to be taken seriously. Otherwise it is another toothless piece of legislation that targets nations genuinely interested in working with the UN while letting those that choose to ignore it go on unchecked.