Somebody please please PLEASE help me understand what I am missing here!
According to the Hudood Ordinance enforced by dictator Zia in 1979, - "a rape victim is liable to prosecution for adultery if she fails to produce four male witnesses to her ordeal"
Wiki puts it as - "A woman alleging rape is required to provide four adult male witnesses of "the act of penetration", and if the accused man is Muslim, the witnesses must be Muslims themselves. Failure to prove rape places the woman at risk of prosecution for adultery, which does not require such strong evidence"
and today after more than 25 years when Pakistan is trying to get this ridiculously absurd law changed , some wonder why!!!
BBC says - The MMA parties boycotted the vote, saying the bill encouraged "free sex"
at this point I want to bang my head onto the monitor in hope of simply understanding ... "how?"
Rape is the extremest form of violation and these people are making a joke of the whole affair.
I just want to scream out loud - really really loud - coz at this point thats probably all that I can do! I'm feeling sick to my stomach!
are these people even sane? don't they have daughters or wives or sisters? If I was a woman in Pakistan I would just leave ... or if nothing else have a few of these MMA folks, nevermind that they are mostly men, raped ... and then left to heal ... and then raped some more ... and then produce 3 witnesses - not 4 - at the Sharia courts ... lets see how that feels ... to be slammed for adultery on top of everything else that happened!!
I'm sorry - I know that was an extreme thing to say ... even inappropriate ... but thats exactly how I am feeling right now!
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
tell me I'm missing something and I've got all of this wrong ... please please please
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Venky's Blog
Saara's Journey
About Me
- Venky
- Lakshmi Nursing Home -> Chembur -> Swami Vivekanand High School -> Vashi -> Fr. Agnels -> N.Y.S.S. COE -> Soumya -> COSL -> Bangalore -> Infosys -> Elements -> Sunnyvale -> NCSU MBA -> Raleigh -> Houston -> Sourcing Specialist -> Angola -> Saara
4 comments:
What I don't understand is what is wrong with free sex.
Raoul, its just like "free" lunch.
the hudud law which you're referring is tempered.
The truth law is, if unmarried woman & man is accused for having sex, the accuser must prove his accusation along with four witness (and the criteria of the witness must be 'baligh' or adult, the witness must be somebody that is known that he is an honest person).
Then if the accuser can prove that, then both the unmarried couple will be convicted with 100x cane.
But if the accuser is wrong, then the accuser will be punish with 80x cane for making false accusation.
regards,
Azzam
Yep. Sad but true. That's how Sharia works.
Shari'ah law only provides for punishment in cases of adultery, if both parties admit to have committed the "crime". If this is not the case, four independent witnesses have to be found; however, the witnesses must be male. In cases of rape, shari'ah rules that a rapist is to be punished with 100 lashes, if unmarried, or with death by stoning, if married, since this would then constitute adultery.
The law is based on an event in the life of Muhammad, when his favourite wife, Aisha, was suspected of adultery. To clear her name, he demanded four witnesses to the act. Allah demanded: "Why did they not produce four witnesses? If they could not produce witnesses, then they were surely lying in the sight of God" (Sura 24:13). This law acquitted Aisha, but has led to the suffering of hundreds of women.
Have you followed the Imrana rape story in the Indian media?
Post a Comment