NationStates Jolt Archive

Couple Caned In Indonesia's Aceh For Having Sex

A couple in Indonesia's Aceh province were publicly caned Friday for having sex out of wedlock, as authorities continue to enforce a controversial statue allowing Shariah, or Islamic law.

Syahrul Rizal, 21, and his girlfriend Liza Wahyuni, 20, received five and three lashes respectively outside a mosque in the capital Banda Aceh following Friday prayers, according to a Deutsche Presse-Agentur dpa reporter on the scene.

They had been caught in November 2006 having sexual intercourse.

Indonesia is the world's largest Muslim-majority nation but has a secular government and constitution. However, the national parliament has allowed Shariah in Aceh, which is considered the most pious province in the country.

The law was rarely enforced until after the December 2004 Asian Tsunami, which killed 177,000 people in Aceh alone. The province's Shariah enforcement police began breaking into homes without warrants looking for people engaged in immoral behaviour, illegally arresting women for not wearing jilbobs and harassing the poor.

The "Shariah police" have administered numerous public canings of people convicted of drinking alcohol, gambling, adultery, and premarital sex, to both punish and publicly shame them.

"With this, we hope that society can apply Islamic law together," Nasir Ilyas, chief of the Shariah enforcement office, told dpa after the caning.

In the past year, the Acehnese public has become increasingly agitated by the enforcement office's behaviour, and there was a series of confrontations and clashes last year between citizens and police.

Friday's caning was the first one this year but the province's incoming governor has promised changes to the Shariah enforcement policy that could include halting physical punishments.

Link (http://www.playfuls.com/news_10_8702-Couple-Caned-In-Indonesias-Aceh-For-Having-Sex.html)

At least the guy got more lashes than the chick. I didn't see that coming.

Link (http://www.playfuls.com/news_10_8702-Couple-Caned-In-Indonesias-Aceh-For-Having-Sex.html)

At least the guy got more lashes than the chick. I didn't see that coming.

Idiots. Sex is perfectly okay, it's just that people don't understand that.

I expect Soviestan will come and jump to the whippers' defense.

Religion of peace my ass.

In my religion what happens if you have sex before marriage is that you get tickled on your feet with a feather, if allergic you have to listen to Paris Hilton talk.

Sex is bad, mmmmkay?

Sex is bad, mmmmkay?Die, you big headed bastard.:cool:

In my religion what happens if you have sex before marriage is that you get tickled on your feet with a feather, if allergic you have to listen to Paris Hilton talk.

I'll take the caning rather than listen to Paris Hilton talk.

Die, you big headed bastard.:cool:

*castrates*

Idiots. Sex is perfectly okay, it's just that people don't understand that.

I expect Soviestan will come and jump to the whippers' defense.

that's if they got them

I'll take the caning rather than listen to Paris Hilton talk.That why no one who has allergies never have sex before marriage in my religion.

Hey, some people really like canings.

Religion of peace my ass.

Yeah, because its not like people have ever used religion to justify their actions. :rolleyes:

Yet more evidence that Shariah Law is backwards, idiotic, and should never be alllowed to continue to exist.

Believe it or not - there's been a time when I would have gladly accepted 5 cane strokes if that meant I would have gotten laid beforehand. http://www.abestweb.com/smilies/arsespank.gif

And while I don't agree with the punishment when two consenting adults share an intimate moment despite them not being married - when in Rome...

Link (http://www.playfuls.com/news_10_8702-Couple-Caned-In-Indonesias-Aceh-For-Having-Sex.html)

At least the guy got more lashes than the chick. I didn't see that coming.

That's a retarded thing to be "at leasting" about. It's stupid that they got lashed at all, and stupider one party got more than the other.

Religion of peace my ass.

Religion of peace my hairy ass. Top that, Ife.

*castrates**Releases hordes of Giant Killer monkeys and Vikings*

*Releases hordes of Giant Killer monkeys and Vikings*
Not into Indonesia. They'll get caned for having sex with women.

i think it's funny that they give more shit about all that stuff after 04

Religion of peace my hairy ass. Top that, Ife.

I don't want to know.......:(

That's a retarded thing to be "at leasting" about. It's stupid that they got lashed at all, and stupider one party got more than the other.

Of course it is stupid in the first place, but I wouldn't have been surprised if the woman was stoned.

*waits for somebody to make pot-related joke*

Of course it is stupid in the first place, but I wouldn't have been surprised if the woman was stoned.

*waits for somebody to make pot-related joke*
*insert pot-related joke here*

What? Did you actually think I was going to make an effort?

Of course it is stupid in the first place, but I wouldn't have been surprised if the woman was stoned.

*waits for somebody to make pot-related joke*

you should know what happen's if you find with shit

Wait, one of those involved in the caning has spoken:

"When we caught them, the man was hogtied with a gag in his mouth, and the woman was hefting a pool cue. We just were ticked off we weren't getting any, and we figured they'd like it, so..."

Idiots. Sex is perfectly okay, it's just that people don't understand that.

I expect Soviestan will come and jump to the whippers' defense.

I think the thing was that they weren't married.

I know my dad would have done the same to me had I done that.

Yet more evidence that Shariah Law is backwards, idiotic, and should never be alllowed to continue to exist.

true. same things go for any form of union of church and state.

I think the thing was that they weren't married.

I know my dad would have done the same to me had I done that.

Wow. Sucks to be you.

I think the thing was that they weren't married.

I know my dad would have done the same to me had I done that.

Oceandrive's troll account?

Yet more evidence that Shariah Law is backwards, idiotic, and should never be alllowed to continue to exist.

similar to the 17 year old in Georgia that was just sentenced to 10 years in prison for having oral sex with his girlfriend.

This thread makes me sad.

...maybe mostly resigned and apathetic, but dejected as well.

I could use a drink.

you should know what happen's if you find with shit

Can I suggest reading your posts before submitting them?

Wow. Sucks to be you.


?

The Bible says no to fornication, so I don't do it....

This thread makes me sad.

...maybe mostly resigned and apathetic, but dejected as well.

I could use a drink.

I'll join you...it's Saturday and I couldn't get a babysitter. We'll make a party of it:)

Can I suggest reading your posts before submitting them?

no just need more rest from leaning stuff for the army

similar to the 17 year old in Georgia that was just sentenced to 10 years in prison for having oral sex with his girlfriend.

Thanks, I didn't want to be the stupid foreigner bringing this to the attention of people who think their legal system is so much more enlightened than anything elsewhere.

similar to the 17 year old in Georgia that was just sentenced to 10 years in prison for having oral sex with his girlfriend.

Create a thread about it and see whether Ifreann jumps in criticising Christianity.

If the majority of the population in Aceh supports the Shariah, then I see nothing wrong with enforcing it.

?

The Bible says no to fornication, so I don't do it....

Fuck that.

No, seriously, cut a hole in the bible, lube it up, and fuck it.

Create a thread about it and see whether Ifreann jumps in criticising Christianity.

Did you actually mean to say Ifreann? Because it's a given...

Yet more evidence that Shariah Law is backwards, idiotic, and should never be alllowed to continue to exist.

QFT.

I'll join you...it's Saturday and I couldn't get a babysitter. We'll make a party of it:)
Hmmm... It's saturday, and I should be sleeping. Haven't done enouh of that lately. But a party sounds like a good idea, and something I could realloy use right about now :)

*Gets drunk*

Create a thread about it and see whether Ifreann jumps in criticising Christianity.
There already is a thread on it (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=511904&). Think there was another one too, but Hell, nobody really cares do they?

Fuck that.

No, seriously, cut a hole in the bible, lube it up, and fuck it.

Best. Post. Ever.

Fuck that.

No, seriously, cut a hole in the bible, lube it up, and fuck it.

QFT.

similar to the 17 year old in Georgia that was just sentenced to 10 years in prison for having oral sex with his girlfriend.
Ugh, seems idiots are everywhere.
?

The Bible says no to fornication, so I don't do it....
Sucks further to be you. Getting beaten for having pre-marital sex is bad enough, but not having premarital sex because a book tells you not to? That's just silly.
Create a thread about it and see whether Ifreann jumps in criticising Christianity.
Why do I get the feeling I'm being watched......

If the majority of the population in Aceh supports the Shariah, then I see nothing wrong with enforcing it.

So, in the past, if the majority of the country supported slavery, it should have been allowed? If the majority of German supported Nazism, then the Jews should have accepted it?

You know, if you enter a latex, crotchless fullbody suit, zipper-holed latex mask...an assorted dildoe kit and a suspended wrist-cuff rack...

I know people that'd pay for it.
Maybe I would too.

You know, if you enter a latex, crotchless fullbody suit, zipper-holed latex mask...an assorted dildoe kit and a suspended wrist-cuff rack...

I know people that'd pay for it.
Maybe I would too.My point exactly.

If the majority of the population in Aceh supports the Shariah, then I see nothing wrong with enforcing it.
the majority isn't always right. go back to ancient times, and the majority of the people will say that there is nothing wrong with slavery. but there are many things wrong with slavery.

Religion of peace my ass.

Obviously since the entire country is not under Shariah law, a sizable group of people in Aceh wanted it and obtained it, presumably the majority.

As for your comments about Islam, they are ignorant. When you choose to adhere to a religion, you choose to follow its rules, and should be prepared to accept the punishments that are prescribed for violating them.

However, I will say that if these statements are true, Shariah is not being properly implemented. Most serious crimes in Islam require 4 witnesses who must then swear for God's punishment against themselves if they are lieing (something a Muslim would not normally do because of fear), and video tapes are inadmissable because of possible alteration, compulsion, etc. Entering someone's home without permission is not allowed, either.

If you are going to blame an entire religion for the crimes of some idiots, then you're ignorant. If you think true Shariah is barbaric, unpeaceful, etc. then don't be a Muslim. It is not your place to criticize a culture/religion that over 1 billion people willingly adhere to, and thereby agree to follow these rules. Many penalties are similarly found in the Bible, and are perhaps even more oftentimes "harsh" in the minds of Christians than are their Islamic counterparts. As a result, most Christians would not advocate enforcing their own religion, as is seen in secular Europe, Australia, and the Americas.

Ugh, seems idiots are everywhere.
Yeah. I, for one, can't seem to shake'em.

Sucks further to be you. Getting beaten for having pre-marital sex is bad enough, but not having premarital sex because a book tells you not to? That's just silly.
Psst! I have a book that says everyone reading the book should give all their money to me. Think it'll work if I switch the pair of them?

Why do I get the feeling I'm being watched......
I have no idea.*Watches*

the majority isn't always right. go back to ancient times, and the majority of the people will say that there is nothing wrong with slavery. but there are many things wrong with slavery.

Well the majority of Muslims do believe that Shariah, if implemented properly (meaning it is only applied to Muslims, not non-Muslims) and truthfully (not breaking into homes, etc.) is a good thing. It is their right as Muslims to have it. For you to apply your own beliefs and call theirs "wrong" is xenophobic and ignorant. Just because you think sleeping around ok doesn't mean that everyone else in the world does.

It is also QUITE ignorant of you to compare being able to sleep around publicly and being able to have slaves.

So, in the past, if the majority of the country supported slavery, it should have been allowed? If the majority of German supported Nazism, then the Jews should have accepted it?
the majority isn't always right. go back to ancient times, and the majority of the people will say that there is nothing wrong with slavery. but there are many things wrong with slavery.
Different situation. The majority would be supporting a system of laws to govern their society based on their own religious beliefs. They're not supporting a system that would make the population have an easier life at the expense of a particular group of people as it would be with slavery.

Nazism lived off of xenophobia and oppression. The Shariah isn't a twisted political ideology - its a lawbook for a proper Islamic state.

the majority isn't always right. go back to ancient times, and the majority of the people will say that there is nothing wrong with slavery. but there are many things wrong with slavery.

Doesn't that pretty much undermine the base principal of democracy though?

Yeah. I, for one, can't seem to shake'em.

Psst! I have a book that says everyone reading the book should give all their money to me. Think it'll work if I switch the pair of them?

I have no idea.*Watches*
GRAVLEN!

I never thought you were this stalker-ish and creepy.

Good, wanna join my stalker club? :p

the majority isn't always right. go back to ancient times, and the majority of the people will say that there is nothing wrong with slavery. but there are many things wrong with slavery.

Like a fellow poster previously said, that does INDEED UNDERMIND THE PRINCIPLE OF DEMOCRACY. Apparently you believe that your personal views are always right, and that they need to be implemented around the world because all those ignorant brown people don't know what's good for them. What arrogance!

GRAVLEN!

I never thought you were this stalker-ish and creepy.

Good, wanna join my stalker club? :p

Since I had absolutely nothing to do, I figured "What the Hell, why not go creepy? All the cool kidz are creepy anyway..."

So to answer your question: For the love of Harly Davidson and the Marlboro Man, YES PLEASE!

:)

Since I had absolutely nothing to do, I figured "What the Hell, why not go creepy? All the cool kidz are creepy anyway..."

So to answer your question: For the love of Harly Davidson and the Marlboro Man, YES PLEASE!

:)
No white text hidden? I'm disappointed in you. Your stalker creepiness just plumetted. You better start making the points up!

Doesn't that pretty much undermine the base principal of democracy though?

Not representative democracy, no.

Not into Indonesia. They'll get caned for having sex with women.Which one the monkey or Vikings? As the Vikings are currently listed as sexual predators.

Obviously since the entire country is not under Shariah law, a sizable group of people in Aceh wanted it and obtained it, presumably the majority.
What does that hve to do with anything?

As for your comments about Islam, they are ignorant. When you choose to adhere to a religion, you choose to follow its rules, and should be prepared to accept the punishments that are prescribed for violating them.
I can't reconcile public beatings with being peaceful, but if I'm wrong about Islam being alleged to be a relgion of peace then please enlighten me about the truth.

However, I will say that if these statements are true, Shariah is not being properly implemented. Most serious crimes in Islam require 4 witnesses who must then swear for God's punishment against themselves if they are lieing (something a Muslim would not normally do because of fear), and video tapes are inadmissable because of possible alteration, compulsion, etc. Entering someone's home without permission is not allowed, either.
Would sex outside marraige count as a serious crime under Shariah law?
If you are going to blame an entire religion for the crimes of some idiots, then you're ignorant.
Quite possibly
If you think true Shariah is barbaric, unpeaceful, etc. then don't be a Muslim.Oh I won't be

I think you'll find I can criticise anything I want. Free speech is great like that.
[quote]Many penalties are similarly found in the Bible, and are perhaps even more oftentimes "harsh" in the minds of Christians than are their Islamic counterparts.As a result, most Christians would not advocate enforcing their own religion, as is seen in secular Europe, Australia, and the Americas.
I consider not enforcing overly harsh punishments that don't fit the crime they're prescribed to a good thing.
Yeah. I, for one, can't seem to shake'em.
They're like a bad rash.

Psst! I have a book that says everyone reading the book should give all their money to me. Think it'll work if I switch the pair of them?
I think it's been done.
I have no idea.*Watches*

I wonder what it could be........
FNORD

No white text hidden? I'm disappointed in you. Your stalker creepiness just plumetted. You better start making the points up!
There was a warning written above the post you know.
It was a diversionary maneuver - I can't be seen as predictable, can I now :p
:p
Besides, Indents are fun ;-)

Which one the monkey or Vikings? As the Vikings are currently listed as sexual predators.

both

Which one the monkey or Vikings? As the Vikings are currently listed as sexual predators.
Sexual predators or not, if they're caught boning a girl, they get caned. Though the Vikings might enjoy the caning. Who knows?
There was a warning written above the post you know.
It was a diversionary maneuver - I can't be seen as predictable, can I now :p
:p
Besides, Indents are fun ;-)
Yeah yeah, it still doesn't work.

*tries to hide the fact that she missed the title*

*flees*

For you to apply your own beliefs and call theirs "wrong" is xenophobic and ignorant.

Ignorant? Of what? I am fully aware of the customs and culture it has grown from, but that makes it no less wrong. Would you call somebody xenophobic and ignorant if they condemned the cultural revolution or to go back to the earlier analogy, Nazism? I agree that moral, ethics, values etc are relative, but I don't see how it is ignorant of me to think that Shariah law, how it is imposed in some instances, is an infringement on human rights.

Roma Islamica...why does that poster name remind me of someone who used to troll here?

Sexual predators or not, if they're caught boning a girl, they get caned. Though the Vikings might enjoy the caning. Who knows?

Yeah yeah, it still doesn't work.

*tries to hide the fact that she missed the title*

*flees*
:)
Sleep might be a good idea
*Goes to bed*

What does that hve to do with anything?
It's democratically justified to put the Sharia into place.

I can't reconcile public beatings with being peaceful, but if I'm wrong about Islam being alleged to be a relgion of peace then please enlighten me about the truth.
What you're seeing in Aceh is the legal theory that scholars have deemed an appropriate form of governing an Islamic state - except its not being applied right. You're not seeing the faith of Islam itself.

Would sex outside marraige count as a serious crime under Shariah law?
Yes.

I think you'll find I can criticise anything I want. Free speech is great like that.
Sure you have that right and also certain duties as outlined in your constitution. Muslims have their own rights and obligations that differ from your own too.

I consider not enforcing overly harsh punishments that don't fit the crime they're prescribed to a good thing.
Follow the code and you needn't worry about suffering the consequences.

similar to the 17 year old in Georgia that was just sentenced to 10 years in prison for having oral sex with his girlfriend. Exactly!

similar to the 17 year old in Georgia that was just sentenced to 10 years in prison for having oral sex with his girlfriend.

I guess this guy would have preferred the caning.

I assume they enforce sharia now because they believe in some form of godly punishment? If so, I'll bet if there is no further tsunami in the next couple of years, they'll think they have prevented it. :eek:

Roma Islamica...why does that poster name remind me of someone who used to troll here?

Defending the rights of people to self-govern how they wish and deploring the misuse of it is not "trolling". Nor have I trolled. Notice how I've been a member since Nov. 2003 and have very few posts considering.

Defending the rights of people to self-govern how they wish and deploring the misuse of it is not "trolling". Nor have I trolled. Notice how I've been a member since Nov. 2003 and have very few posts considering.

Oh no, I'm not accusing you of trolling. I'd be blunt about it. Was there another poster with 'Roma' in the name that was a nazi? (again, not saying you are a nazi, I'm quite serious here). It's bugging me...

Caning gets me hot.

Follow the code and you needn't worry about suffering the consequences.

Two consenting people should be allowed to fuck without fear of getting caned. The fact that they were and are means that the code restricts human rights. We shouldn't respect such a stupid law or anyone that tries to justify such infringements on people's freedoms.

That's a retarded thing to be "at leasting" about. It's stupid that they got lashed at all, and stupider one party got more than the other.

Well said.

I keep reading the Title as "Coup Canned.."...:(

Two consenting people should be allowed to fuck without fear of getting caned. The fact that they were and are means that the code restricts human rights. We shouldn't respect such a stupid law or anyone that tries to justify such infringements on people's freedoms.
It may be stupid to you, but not to God-fearing Muslims. Sex out of wedlock just isn't permitted and Muslims are expected to adhere to that rule otherwise face the consequences. Doing so would just show that they don't fear God and the lashing is a tool to instill the fear in them. As barbaric as it may sound to you because of the way you have been raised to understand the world, it's perfectly understandable to others.

Human rights are nice, but to followers of Islam those rights mean nothing compared to the rights that have been outlined by God.

However, that doesn't mean this 'Sharia police' is justified in barging into peoples homes and delivering punishment without trial. The Sharia doesn't permit that.

I keep reading the Title as "Coup Canned.."...:(
I keep reading the title as "Indonesia's aching to have sex"...

I agree this is rediculous(apparently I'm spelling this word wrong), but hey. Its possible to get life in prison in alabama for selling a marijuana joint to a 17 year old. I don't know of cases of this, but there are plenty of other rediculous cases like this.

Victimless crimes should not be punishable.

I agree this is rediculous(apparently I'm spelling this word wrong), but hey. Its possible to get life in prison in alabama for selling a marijuana joint to a 17 year old. I don't know of cases of this, but there are plenty of other rediculous cases like this.

Victimless crimes should not be punishable.

There's no 'e.'

Victimless crimes should not be punishable.

But...how else can we catch them nasty 17 year olds having sex with 15 year olds?

Obviously since the entire country is not under Shariah law, a sizable group of people in Aceh wanted it and obtained it, presumably the majority.

As for your comments about Islam, they are ignorant. When you choose to adhere to a religion, you choose to follow its rules, and should be prepared to accept the punishments that are prescribed for violating them.

However, I will say that if these statements are true, Shariah is not being properly implemented. Most serious crimes in Islam require 4 witnesses who must then swear for God's punishment against themselves if they are lieing (something a Muslim would not normally do because of fear), and video tapes are inadmissable because of possible alteration, compulsion, etc. Entering someone's home without permission is not allowed, either.

If you are going to blame an entire religion for the crimes of some idiots, then you're ignorant. If you think true Shariah is barbaric, unpeaceful, etc. then don't be a Muslim. It is not your place to criticize a culture/religion that over 1 billion people willingly adhere to, and thereby agree to follow these rules. Many penalties are similarly found in the Bible, and are perhaps even more oftentimes "harsh" in the minds of Christians than are their Islamic counterparts. As a result, most Christians would not advocate enforcing their own religion, as is seen in secular Europe, Australia, and the Americas.


Terribly sorry if you're offended by people pointing out there is a lot of violence in these Shariah punishments, and that it's a perversion of the message of peace in the Koran.

There's no 'e.'

So its rdiculous? That seems wrong too. :P

So its rdiculous? That seems wrong too. :P

It's 'ridiculous,' you language-hating terrorist. It's time we invaded you to establish a dictionary.

It's 'ridiculous,' you language-hating terrorist. It's time we invaded you to establish a dictionary.

Anglais est une langue pour les bete.

Anglais est une langue pour les bete.

Your French isn't much better.

Terribly sorry if you're offended by people pointing out there is a lot of violence in these Shariah punishments, and that it's a perversion of the message of peace in the Koran.

That's not what Ifreann said. He said "Religion of peace my ass." Which, if my sarcaz-o-meter is not broken, is not criticizing anything but the religion of Islam.

As for myself, I'm not offended, but it always disgusts me when people use a minority to judge and stereotype an entirety. Kinda like assuming all Republicans are Muslim-hating nazis and all Democrats are America-hating homosexuals.

That's not what Ifreann said. He said "Religion of peace my ass." Which, if my sarcaz-o-meter is not broken, is not criticizing anything but the religion of Islam.



You don't know Ifreann, do you?

That was fairly obviously a joke about how if this was your first exposure to islam, imagine what you would think.

"The province's Shariah enforcement police began breaking into homes without warrants looking for people engaged in immoral behaviour, illegally arresting women for not wearing jilbobs and harassing the poor."

The enforcers of morality are always the most immoral. And where the hell is soviestan? I have to go to bed in 2 hours and I havent taunted him today.

It may be stupid to you, but not to God-fearing Muslims. Sex out of wedlock just isn't permitted and Muslims are expected to adhere to that rule otherwise face the consequences. Doing so would just show that they don't fear God and the lashing is a tool to instill the fear in them. As barbaric as it may sound to you because of the way you have been raised to understand the world, it's perfectly understandable to others.

Oh no, I completely understand that they are raised in Islam with certain values, just as Christians are in the US or Australia. But, fortunately, there are no modern nations with laws handing out punishments as directed to from the bible, or we'd have one big pile of dead homosexuals. At this day in age I see no way an intelligent person, can justify laws being based off a book written more than a thousand years ago.

It may be stupid to you, but not to God-fearing Muslims. Sex out of wedlock just isn't permitted and Muslims are expected to adhere to that rule otherwise face the consequences. Doing so would just show that they don't fear God and the lashing is a tool to instill the fear in them. As barbaric as it may sound to you because of the way you have been raised to understand the world, it's perfectly understandable to others.


Just because they don't think it's stupid doesn't mean it isn't stupid.

Couple caned in Indonesia's Aceh for having sex?
That's just so wrong.

They should have been caned while having sex. It's a helluva lot more fun that way.

Couple caned in Indonesia's Aceh for having sex?
That's just so wrong.

They should have been caned while having sex. It's a helluva lot more fun that way.

I second this.

I second this.
I figured you would, you naughty naughty Zarakon!

I figured you would, you naughty naughty Zarakon!

Yeah, yeah. I can barely walk, but I'm happy!

Oh no, I'm not accusing you of trolling. I'd be blunt about it. Was there another poster with 'Roma' in the name that was a nazi? (again, not saying you are a nazi, I'm quite serious here). It's bugging me...

I dunno. I can tell you that I am NOT a Nazi however. I support the rights of people to self-govern, and believe in the sovereignty of individual nations.

Doesn't Indonesia have a sex slave trade? If so, then canning two people for having sex outside of marriage is pretty damn ironic and hypocritical.

Doesn't Indonesia have a sex slave trade? If so, then canning two people for having sex outside of marriage is pretty damn ironic and hypocritical.

Governments rarely realize their own hypocrisy.

Governments rarely realize their own hypocrisy.

Make that never and you have an accurate statement.

Two consenting people should be allowed to fuck without fear of getting caned. The fact that they were and are means that the code restricts human rights. We shouldn't respect such a stupid law or anyone that tries to justify such infringements on people's freedoms.

In Islam having sex out of wedlock while unmarried is a serious crime. Doing it while married with someone other than your spouse is even worse. To you, being able to "fuck without fear of getting caned" may be your right in the nation that you live in, but obviously this is not universally agreed upon as a right. You cannot impose your society's beliefs on another. In Mayan society it was their right to sacrifice people to their gods, however I'm sure you wouldn't agree with that either. Being able to have sex outside of marriage is not a universal human right, nor has it been declared one by any international organization.

Doesn't Indonesia have a sex slave trade? If so, then canning two people for having sex outside of marriage is pretty damn ironic and hypocritical.

Indonesia's government does not have a sex slave trade. Typically in Southeast Asia in general (not sure the prevalence in Indonesia in particular) there is ILLEGAL human trafficking, with foreign corporations with business interests in the region often turning a blind eye to what their foreign management does to contribute to the slave trade.

Make that never and you have an accurate statement.

Exactly

Indonesia's government does not have a sex slave trade. Typically in Southeast Asia in general (not sure the prevalence in Indonesia in particular) there is ILLEGAL human trafficking, with foreign corporations with business interests in the region often turning a blind eye to what their foreign management does to contribute to the slave trade.

So, Indonesia knows there is illegal human trafficking, but turns a blind eye. That is just as bad as sponsoring it. How can the Indonesia cane two consensual adults for having pre-marital sex, but turn a blind eye to human trafficking, which is not consensual?

In Islam having sex out of wedlock while unmarried is a serious crime. Doing it while married with someone other than your spouse is even worse. To you, being able to "fuck without fear of getting caned" may be your right in the nation that you live in, but obviously this is not universally agreed upon as a right. You cannot impose your society's beliefs on another. In Mayan society it was their right to sacrifice people to their gods, however I'm sure you wouldn't agree with that either. Being able to have sex outside of marriage is not a universal human right, nor has it been declared one by any international organization.

Obviously not all your people willingly share your society's beliefs, so why do you have the right to impose your beliefs on others?

Terribly sorry if you're offended by people pointing out there is a lot of violence in these Shariah punishments, and that it's a perversion of the message of peace in the Koran.

Punishments are punishments, and they are sanctioned by God (Islamic point of view). Going in peoples homes, however, is not part of Shariah. So that aspect of it is not a problem with Shariah, it's a problem with those who are supposedly implementing it. If you think being whipped for lechery is "violent" then that's your opinion, however it is not your right to interfere with Democracy when it suits you.

Just because they don't think it's stupid doesn't mean it isn't stupid.

Just because you think that you're somehow enlightened and above them enough to know what's best for them doesn't mean you are.

Obviously not all your people willingly share your society's beliefs, so why do you have the right to impose your beliefs on others?

I don't impose my beliefs on anyone. I am not from Banda Aceh, or any part of Indonesia. Thanks for being ignorant!

However, I believe the people of Banda Aceh have the right to self-government, and they voted for Shariah. That's Democracy. If a minority of the people who live there don't like it, they either
1. Need to do a better job of hiding their sins
2. Move to another province in Indonesia, since most of them DON'T have Shariah Law.

Oh no, I completely understand that they are raised in Islam with certain values, just as Christians are in the US or Australia. But, fortunately, there are no modern nations with laws handing out punishments as directed to from the bible, or we'd have one big pile of dead homosexuals. At this day in age I see no way an intelligent person, can justify laws being based off a book written more than a thousand years ago.

It's very ignorant of you to assume that Muslims, or any non-Westerners for that matter should think the way a Westerner does. Most don't. Muslims in general believe that the Qur'an and the Hadith are their guides to living appropriately. They believe this will be the case until the end of time. Just because many Christians abandoned what they believed to be sanctioned by their religion doesn't mean everyone else should or have to.

I don't impose my beliefs on anyone. I am not from Banda Aceh, or any part of Indonesia. Thanks for being ignorant!

Hit a nerve huh, so you resort to mud throwing ... :p

However, I believe the people of Banda Aceh have the right to self-government, and they voted for Shariah. That's Democracy. If a minority of the people who live there don't like it, they either
1. Need to do a better job of hiding their sins
2. Move to another province in Indonesia, since most of them DON'T have Shariah Law.

Democracy is freedom to make decisions for yourself, even God gives you the right to freewill. And why should they have to move if they like the area just not the politians?

So, Indonesia knows there is illegal human trafficking, but turns a blind eye. That is just as bad as sponsoring it. How can the Indonesia cane two consensual adults for having pre-marital sex, but turn a blind eye to human trafficking, which is not consensual?

For one, we haven't established whether or not or to what degree this happens in Indonesia. I mentioned Southeast Asia in general, and no one has since cited anything.

Let's say that is does happen and that is does pull in significant numbers. Most non-Western governments don't have the power to police the representatives (be they ethnically Western or non-Western) of Western corporations. To call it "turning a blind eye" is ignorant and shows a lack of understanding of the nature of modern human trafficking.

Once again, Indonesia as a WHOLE does not implement Shariah Law. Banda Aceh, a small province, does. Policing on a small level is relatively easy. I will say, however, that if these individuals were caught whilst in the security of their own homes by police or any others invading their homes (and not relatives who happened to disapprove) then that is AGAINST Shariah Law.

Democracy is freedom to make decisions for yourself, even God gives you the right to freewill. And why should they have to move if they like the area just not the politians?

Democracy is not freedom to make decisions for yourself. Democracy is rule by majority. If the majority of the people of Banda Aceh wanted Shariah law, that is Democracy. You're just used to many extra rights that come about from Democracy in your area and consider that as Democracy itself.

In the U.S. for instance, we even have protections AGAINST Democracy. For instance, after 9/11, many Americans supported an OUTRIGHT curtailing of individual rights in favor of security. The PATRIOT Act was implemented, which while most likely unconstitutional, is not so EXPLICITLY so and could be argued either way. However, many Americans would have favored implementing something OBVIOUSLY unconstitutional, but because of our constitution, this could not be done.

LOL, Indonesia. It appears they're quite a paragon of virtue.

They have shitty planes, too.

LOL, Indonesia. It appears they're quite a paragon of virtue.

They have shitty planes, too.

Because everyone knows measuring a nation's aeronautical capabilities is a litmus test of its worth, culture, and societal contribution and worth. My thoughts exactly. =/

Because everyone knows measuring a nation's aeronautical capabilities is a litmus test of its worth, culture, and societal contribution and worth. My thoughts exactly. =/

I've been thinking really hard, but I can't seem to find within me a reason to care about the intangible cultural worth of Indonesia.

They do export some raw materials to the United States. I suppose they're good for something, after all.

Democracy is not freedom to make decisions for yourself. Democracy is rule by majority. If the majority of the people of Banda Aceh wanted Shariah law, that is Democracy. You're just used to many extra rights that come about from Democracy in your area and consider that as Democracy itself.
There isn’t anything wrong with people following Islam or any other benign religion, and there isn’t anything wrong with them practicing that religion in the way they choose. It’s only when you start enforcing your beliefs on others that it becomes a problem.

Democracy is not an end in and of itself; it is merely a means to an end. More often than not, it leads to greater freedom, but when the majority is opposed to human rights, and there are no protections in place for the minority, democracy is no better than the worst tyranny.

Just because you think that you're somehow enlightened and above them enough to know what's best for them doesn't mean you are.

Please explain how you can believe this and still not see a problem with the people implementing sharia law, or any law for that matter, on others who obviously don't have the same ideas about what is best for them.

Democracy is not freedom to make decisions for yourself. Democracy is rule by majority.

Uh, no. Direct democracy perhaps, but not the representative democracy which is the common method used world wide. From the wiki article: "Representative democracy is a form of democracy founded on the exercise of popular sovereignty by the people's representatives. The representatives supposedly act in the people's interest, but not as their proxy representative—i.e., not necessarily always according to wishes, but with enough authority to exercise initiative in the face of changing circumstances."

Just because the majority in a country want certain laws in place doesn't mean they should be; civil rights for example.

Not sure if it was you but somebody earlier said if they didn't want to get caned they should either a) be more secretive about it or b) move away. Not sure how less public you can get considering you do it in private, lol. And moving away? That is like telling Martin Luther King to fuck off back to Africa if he didn't like the way the laws treated blacks. And that is a valid analogy too.

Please explain how you can believe this and still not see a problem with the people implementing sharia law, or any law for that matter, on others who obviously don't have the same ideas about what is best for them.

I'm fairly certain psychopathic killers have problems against laws regarding murder.

But that probably doesn't work quite well, how about another one?

Take for example, the Australian recently caught smuggling heroin through Singapore airport and got caught? The law there says drug smuggling is punishable by death and make it quite clear before landing. They also provide amnesty bins where you can junk the stuff and walk without hanging.

But oh no, he had to get caught. And Australians everywhere were in uproar. How dare they punish him for breaking the law! Drug smuggling is harmless! We should boycott Singapore!

If the legal government of the place enacts a law, visitors and residents must comply or face the consequences when caught, even if they don't agree with it. If you don't like it, either change the government, remove the law, or leave the place.

A fact that most people don't like when confronted with laws they don't agree with.

I'm fairly certain psychopathic killers have problems against laws regarding murder.

But that probably doesn't work quite well, how about another one?

Take for example, the Australian recently caught smuggling heroin through Singapore airport and got caught? The law there says drug smuggling is punishable by death and make it quite clear before landing. They also provide amnesty bins where you can junk the stuff and walk without hanging.

But oh no, he had to get caught. And Australians everywhere were in uproar. How dare they punish him for breaking the law! Drug smuggling is harmless! We should boycott Singapore!

Let me clarify a few things about the Bali drug cases...

Australia is anti-capital punishment and except in a few cases such as terrorists or Hussein, the government objects openly to it.

The Australians who were in an uproar, the majority of whom from my experience were yobs, were upset because it was Schappell Corby who denied the charges. And with her being a pretty media darling the yobs obviously did whatever it is they did. Meanwhile there wasn't any tears for the Bali Nine (thought there were obviously objections against being given the death penalty).

This is irrelevant anyway, since drug smuggling as a crime has no similarities to two consenting adults having sex. Drug smuggling and dealing, especially of hard drugs, is not an innocent act. It creates crime directly and indirectly as well as death directly and indirectly. Meanwhile it is also a crime for two 20-year olds to have sex in the privacy of their own home, and you defend that as just merely because it is their culture.

I agree the Bali Nine and Corby are idiots who should be punished by the way.

If the legal government of the place enacts a law, visitors and residents must comply or face the consequences when caught, even if they don't agree with it.

Obv. Nobody is debating that. What I and others are saying is that the law is completely fucked and should not be in place. We know that their laws arise from their religion, region, culture etc, but that doesn't make it any more ridiculous.

Punishments are punishments, and they are sanctioned by God (Islamic point of view). Going in peoples homes, however, is not part of Shariah. So that aspect of it is not a problem with Shariah, it's a problem with those who are supposedly implementing it. If you think being whipped for lechery is "violent" then that's your opinion, however it is not your right to interfere with Democracy when it suits you.

I'm not interfering. I'm saying it's brutal, vicious, illegal (in your own words!) and immoral.

And let's see, what does the dictionary say about violence?

Main Entry: vi·o·lent
Pronunciation: -l&nt
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin violentus; akin to Latin vis strength -- more at VIM
1 : marked by extreme force or sudden intense activity <a violent attack>
2 a : notably furious or vehement <a violent denunciation> b : EXTREME, INTENSE <violent pain> <violent colors>
3 : caused by force : not natural <a violent death>
4 a : emotionally agitated to the point of loss of self-control <became violent after an insult> b : prone to commit acts of violence <violent prison inmates>
- vi·o·lent·ly adverb

Main Entry: vi·o·lence
Pronunciation: 'vI-l&n(t)s, 'vI-&-
Function: noun
1 a : exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse (as in warfare effecting illegal entry into a house) b : an instance of violent treatment or procedure
2 : injury by or as if by distortion, infringement, or profanation : OUTRAGE
3 a : intense, turbulent, or furious and often destructive action or force <the violence of the storm> b : vehement feeling or expression : FERVOR; also : an instance of such action or feeling c : a clashing or jarring quality : DISCORDANCE
4 : undue alteration (as of wording or sense in editing a text)

Oooh, so I see, that beating someone IS actually violent. That's why educated people CALL it violence.

At least the guy got more lashes than the chick. I didn't see that coming. QFT. That was my first thought when I read it.

Also, how terrifying are the two thing I bolded here:
The law was rarely enforced until after the December 2004 Asian Tsunami, which killed 177,000 people in Aceh alone. The province's Shariah enforcement police began breaking into homes without warrants looking for people engaged in immoral behaviour, illegally arresting women for not wearing jilbobs and harassing the poor.

I didn't know that the province government (not really the people, as the article hints in the end) has made such a turn to terror in the aftermath of the tsunami. Although I guess it's not that surprising in a situation of utter destruction and a vacuum of pretty much everything. Fuck them.

And breaking into people's homes to look if they're behaving "morally"? Holy shit.


ETA: I know, I know - way late in the game. >.< Saw the thread only now, sorry to interrupt.

Drug smuggling and dealing, especially of hard drugs, is not an innocent act. It creates crime directly and indirectly as well as death directly and indirectly.

Corby's case was marijuana was it not? And many people argue that it is harmless (although I fail to see how hallucinogens are harmless) and does not contribute to crime. They were also among the noisy ones who protested the sentence.


Meanwhile it is also a crime for two 20-year olds to have sex in the privacy of their own home, and you defend that as just merely because it is their culture.

I never specified culture. I specified law. And unfortunately, that is the law.



Obv. Nobody is debating that. What I and others are saying is that the law is completely fucked and should not be in place. We know that their laws arise from their religion, region, culture etc, but that doesn't make it any more ridiculous.

Many laws are ridiculous, I will give you that. But they are there, and if undesirable, should be repealed using lawful methods.

Like I have said before Islam is an evil, backward, and twisted religion.

Uh, no. Direct democracy perhaps, but not the representative democracy which is the common method used world wide. From the wiki article: "Representative democracy is a form of democracy founded on the exercise of popular sovereignty by the people's representatives. The representatives supposedly act in the people's interest, but not as their proxy representative—i.e., not necessarily always according to wishes, but with enough authority to exercise initiative in the face of changing circumstances."

Just because the majority in a country want certain laws in place doesn't mean they should be; civil rights for example.

Not sure if it was you but somebody earlier said if they didn't want to get caned they should either a) be more secretive about it or b) move away. Not sure how less public you can get considering you do it in private, lol. And moving away? That is like telling Martin Luther King to fuck off back to Africa if he didn't like the way the laws treated blacks. And that is a valid analogy too.

It isn't like telling MLK to go back to Africa because Banda Aceh is a small province in a large country, not a continent thousands of miles away with a different culture, etc. Poor comparison.

Like I have said before Islam is an evil, backward, and twisted religion.

No, it has just been corrupted by those in power, those muslim citizens don't agree with Sharia law and are fighting against it.

Oooh, so I see, that beating someone IS actually violent. That's why educated people CALL it violence.

No Kat, you should know that Webster's Dictionary is intolerant of other's beliefs.

Fuck that.

No, seriously, cut a hole in the bible, lube it up, and fuck it.

Sigged

No, it has just been corrupted by those in power, those muslim citizens don't agree with Sharia law and are fighting against it.

Shariah is part of Islam. It is being implemented wrongly in Banda Aceh, that's all. If you do think Shariah is evil, then by extension you would have to think Islam is evil. There is nothing "corrupt" about Shariah that is implemented properly.

Shariah is part of Islam. It is being implemented wrongly in Banda Aceh, that's all. If you do think Shariah is evil, then by extension you would have to think Islam is evil. There is nothing "corrupt" about Shariah that is implemented properly.

Fine, whatever. Have it your way. I think Islam is evil. I'm going to go wrap a qu'ran in an israeli flag and force-feed it to a guantanamo detainee.

Religion of peace my ass.

What I find interesting is that apologists will always point to the Koran, and say "it" (whatever "it" is) is not in the Koran, therefore Islam is a religion of peace.

Well, religion is not just the book - it's the people you see practicing it, and how they practice it.

Apparently, Sharia law in Indonesia means you beat people for having sex out of wedlock (which makes you wonder if they want to beat billions of people for doing so).

Corby's case was marijuana was it not? And many people argue that it is harmless (although I fail to see how hallucinogens are harmless) and does not contribute to crime. They were also among the noisy ones who protested the sentence.

Marijuana isnt a hallucinagen. Unless you go to such excess that it sends you loopy. But anything is a hallucinagen in those quantities.

I never specified culture. I specified law. And unfortunately, that is the law.

The law should protect people from being harmed or wronged by other people. If a law is wrong and unjust it serves no purpose and should be ignored. Hence why people smoke pot guilt free, or have sex unmarried in indonesia, or aged 17 in america, or download music or any of the many things which are illegal but not harmful or wrong.


Many laws are ridiculous, I will give you that. But they are there, and if undesirable, should be repealed using lawful methods.

And people should have to suffer in the meantime? If the majority support an unjust law it will never be repealed, or at least not anytime soon.

What I find interesting is that apologists will always point to the Koran, and say "it" (whatever "it" is) is not in the Koran, therefore Islam is a religion of peace.

Well, religion is not just the book - it's the people you see practicing it, and how they practice it.

Yeah, OK. So maybe Christianity is evil because priests molest boys. During confessions, no less! Booh, Christianity must be evil, barbaric and backwards!

Yeah, OK. So maybe Christianity is evil because priests molest boys. During confessions, no less! Booh, Christianity must be evil, barbaric and backwards!

Depends on the frequency of events, and the particular aspect of Christianity, doesn't it?

Catholic priests seem to have a problem, yes.

Countries under sharia law seem to have a problem, yes.

Depends on the frequency of events, and the particular aspect of Christianity, doesn't it?

Catholic priests seem to have a problem, yes.

Countries under sharia law seem to have a problem, yes.

No no no. I'm not talking about a "Problem." I'm talking about being eeeevil and barbaaaaric. Which you agree with, yes? Two major world religions are evil and barbaric?

If not, you're an apologist.

No no no. I'm not talking about a "Problem." I'm talking about being eeeevil and barbaaaaric. Which you agree with, yes? Two major world religions are evil and barbaric?

If not, you're an apologist.

I'm not saying they're "evil and barbaric". I'm saying that they have major problems.

Different problems, but problems nonetheless. Molesting boys and caning adults for having sex is pretty stupid.

I'm not saying they're "evil and barbaric". I'm saying that they have major problems.


Others are. Like the people that tend to go, "lol religion of peace lol." The people that seem to want to take any example as a reason to dismiss and generalize an entire religion.

Others are. Like the people that tend to go, "lol religion of peace lol." The people that seem to want to take any example as a reason to dismiss and generalize an entire religion.

Well, I'm saying that you can't call it a religion of peace with so many examples of violence at various levels - terrorism, caning people for natural behavior, shooting people for listening to music, etc.

I think that the Catholic church, in particular its clergy, have a major problem with sexual abuse - and there's no denying it.

Islam has a major problem with violence in certain sects and countries, and there's no denying it.

That's not to say that ALL of Islam has a problem, or ALL Catholics are child molesters.

But Islam is NOT a religion of peace.

Well, I'm saying that you can't call it a religion of peace with so many examples of violence at various levels - terrorism, caning people for natural behavior, shooting people for listening to music, etc.

I think that the Catholic church, in particular its clergy, have a major problem with sexual abuse - and there's no denying it.

Islam has a major problem with violence in certain sects and countries, and there's no denying it.

That's not to say that ALL of Islam has a problem, or ALL Catholics are child molesters.

But Islam is NOT a religion of peace.

If you're saying that the entire religion is not one of peace, you are essentially saying that yes, ALL of Islam is barbaric and violent etc.

And it's not just the Catholic Church. There are lots of depraved, hateful, violent Christians everywhere.

What you are doing is the equivalent of looking at them and saying aha, Christianity; Christ's message must be one of violence and hate.

If you're saying that the entire religion is not one of peace, you are essentially saying that yes, ALL of Islam is barbaric and violent etc.

Nope. Saying they're not a religion of peace isn't saying that they're barbaric and violent.

I'm saying they have major problems that they have to deal with. Christianity has its problems as well, and someone has to deal with them.

Just saying that a religion is one of flowers and happiness doesn't even begin to address the problems.

And saying that a religion has major problems doesn't mean it's evil and barbaric - it's just one aspect of it.

I tend to be a bit more precise when mentioning specific problems, such as caning people for having sex.

Yeah, OK. So maybe Christianity is evil because priests molest boys. During confessions, no less! Booh, Christianity must be evil, barbaric and backwards!

AFAIK, the Priests molesting kids aren't convinced to do so by the Bible.

Dwarfstein. Please quote properly. It's a bit of a pain to reply otherwise.


Marijuana isnt a hallucinagen. Unless you go to such excess that it sends you loopy. But anything is a hallucinagen in those quantities.


Nevertheless, it was a drug, and against the law to bring in. Ignorance is not a protection from the law, and she chose to ignore it. Some people may think their pet tigers are harmless oversized cats, but there is no chance you could take them outside for a walk without being arrested for it.

You do not have to like the law, but if you break it, you must be prepared for the consequences.


The law should protect people from being harmed or wronged by other people. If a law is wrong and unjust it serves no purpose and should be ignored. Hence why people smoke pot guilt free, or have sex unmarried in indonesia, or aged 17 in america, or download music or any of the many things which are illegal but not harmful or wrong.

Ideally, the law exists to serve and protect the people. Realistically, it doesn't.

And people should have to suffer in the meantime? If the majority support an unjust law it will never be repealed, or at least not anytime soon.

What would you do then? Topple the local government? Stage mass protests (that don't really do anything anyway)? Kill the people involved?

There are proper channels to doing these things, and if you cannot change them, then leaving becomes the next best solution.

AFAIK, the Priests molesting kids aren't convinced to do so by the Bible.

No, you need to use women's health clinic bombings and the slaying of doctors by fundamentalists Christians for a working example. Fortunately, there are a few of them for it to work.

These people were inspired to commit their crimes by their interpretation of the Bible.

Thereby: Christianity is not a religion of peace.

What I find interesting is that apologists will always point to the Koran, and say "it" (whatever "it" is) is not in the Koran, therefore Islam is a religion of peace.

Well, religion is not just the book - it's the people you see practicing it, and how they practice it.

Apparently, Sharia law in Indonesia means you beat people for having sex out of wedlock (which makes you wonder if they want to beat billions of people for doing so).

Shariah law has a DEFINITION. Calling something by a name does not make it so. However, yes, if 4 witnesses testify to having seen people have sex out of wedlock, they are supposed to, according to Shariah, be given 100 lashes. If it is adultery, the penalty is death. However, seeing as though homes are not allowed to be invaded, one would have to be practically a whore to get caught (ie. having sex in bathrooms, store changing rooms etc.). Dragging people from their homes based on suspicion or curiosity is NOT allowed, and this is NOT Shariah.

Depends on the frequency of events, and the particular aspect of Christianity, doesn't it?

Catholic priests seem to have a problem, yes.

Countries under sharia law seem to have a problem, yes.

Most Muslims don't see Shariah Law as a problem. That's your opinion, so stop acting like your opinion should run the world.

Well, I'm saying that you can't call it a religion of peace with so many examples of violence at various levels - terrorism, caning people for natural behavior, shooting people for listening to music, etc.

I think that the Catholic church, in particular its clergy, have a major problem with sexual abuse - and there's no denying it.

Islam has a major problem with violence in certain sects and countries, and there's no denying it.

That's not to say that ALL of Islam has a problem, or ALL Catholics are child molesters.

But Islam is NOT a religion of peace.

Actually, the proportion of Catholic priests who are pedophiles is no greater or smaller than the proportion to the representative population at large, that is, if pedophilia occurs in .01% of the population of the country they're in, then .01% of the priests in that nation will be pedophiles.

The problem came from the Church deciding to cover it all up, and for that they ARE to blame.

However, I think additional blame should be given to parents who accepted hush money. What kind of person sells, not only their child's soul, but the souls of the children molested by that priest?

Dragging people from their homes based on suspicion or curiosity is NOT allowed, and this is NOT Shariah.

Sure it is. See my initial comment.

It's not what is written. It's how it's implemented.

Most Muslims don't see Shariah Law as a problem. That's your opinion, so stop acting like your opinion should run the world.

Most people in the world aren't Muslim, and don't follow sharia law.

If we went by majority rules, sharia law would be considered a problem.

Interesting to see what happens when sexphobic superstition is mixed with state. In America, we have a loud movement of religious individuals who push for pretty much the same kinds of things. I hope we are able to keep them from taking over our country and imposing such absurd laws on the rest of us.

Interesting to see what happens when sexphobic superstition is mixed with state. In America, we have a loud movement of religious individuals who push for pretty much the same kinds of things. I hope we are able to keep them from taking over our country and imposing such absurd laws on the rest of us.

Loud perhaps, but obviously, people in America have a lot of sex without being married, and even in the supposed dark ages of the 1950s, Kinsey proved that out of wedlock sex was quite common.

That, and no one is proposing caning people for adultery. You can't even prosecute someone for adultery nowadays in the US - the idea would be laughed out of court.

Loud perhaps, but obviously, people in America have a lot of sex without being married, and even in the supposed dark ages of the 1950s, Kinsey proved that out of wedlock sex was quite common.

I never said that the sexphobic religious folks were RIGHT. I think they're living in a dream world. But that doesn't seem to stop them.


That, and no one is proposing caning people for adultery. You can't even prosecute someone for adultery nowadays in the US - the idea would be laughed out of court.
No, in America we don't cane people for fornication. However, we do have plenty of people advocating that STDs and forced childbirth be viewed as the appropriate punishments for those who choose to have sex out of wedlock. Federal tax dollars are currently spent on programs that teach children these "values."

one would have to be practically a whore to get caught (ie. having sex in bathrooms, store changing rooms etc.).
Wow.
I'm a whore.

I never knew.

How many other whores are out there in NS land?

Wow.
I'm a whore.

I never knew.

How many other whores are out there in NS land?
Yeah, I found that interesting as well. I guess only whores do it outside of the bedroom...?

Yeah, I found that interesting as well. I guess only whores do it outside of the bedroom...?
Apparently so.
Outside the bedroom and/or outside wedlock = instant whoredom.

I'm so embarrassed.
What will my students think of me? What will their parents?
Their little angels are being taught by a filthy filthy whore!

Apparently so.
Outside the bedroom and/or outside wedlock = instant whoredom.


Whenever I come across a person who shrieks about evil, immoral extramarital sex or other forms of "whoring," two words instantly spring into my mind.

Sour grapes.

Whenever I come across a person who shrieks about evil, immoral extramarital sex or other forms of "whoring," two words instantly spring into my mind.

Sour grapes.
Similarly, for me it's three words:

Not Getting Any.

Most Muslims don't see Shariah Law as a problem. That's your opinion, so stop acting like your opinion should run the world. Sorry I just can't accept such a strict group of laws.


And while I disagree that Islam is not a religion of peace.

I believe many Muslims pratice Islam as a religion of War.

Sorry I don't accept civil right abusing laws.
Back of the bus with you!