posted
Christians follow the laws of the Bible only. All of their religious sources, laws and verdicts come straight from the Bible (if we were to have true Christian countries where Church would rule over the State), except for Roman Catholics where they have other Volumes written by Church Fathers and Popes. But most Christians in the world have no religious resources other than the Bible.
Therefore, let us look at what the Bible says regarding this issue:
Rape is a big crime that could actually take the woman's or the victim's life away. Let us examine how Christianity deals with the rapist: "If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. (From the NIV Bible, Deuteronomy 22:28)" Although this Verse from the Bible only talks about virgins, but its the only verse in the entire Bible that talks about raping single women.
Deuteronomy 22:28 forces the raped woman to marry her rapist. My question to the writers of the Bible is why in the world would any raped female victim want to be in the same town, not the same bedroom !! with her rapist?.
Also, the Bible seems to promote raping of single women: "But if out in the country a man happens to meet a girl pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. (From the NIV Bible, Deuteronomy 22:25)" This is quite an interesting verse. We see in Deuteronomy 22:28 that if a man rapes a single woman then she will be forced to be his wife, while if a man rapes a married woman or a woman who is spoken for, in Deuteronomy 22:25, then he shall be put to death. There is absolutely no punishment for the rapist of a single woman in the Bible.Posts: 1201 | From: Egypt | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think you're being too literal here. Yes there is punishment for rapists. And no, Christians don't only follow the "laws" of the bible. Why don't you try using a little common sense and stop bashing Christians for not being Muslim?
Posts: 1283 | From: Cairo | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mr Egypt: Christians follow the laws of the Bible only. All of their religious sources, laws and verdicts come straight from the Bible (if we were to have true Christian countries where Church would rule over the State)
So can you name such a country?
Posts: 2334 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mr Egypt: Let us examine how Christianity deals with the rapist: "If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. (From the NIV Bible, Deuteronomy 22:28)" Although this Verse from the Bible only talks about virgins, but its the only verse in the entire Bible that talks about raping single women.
Deuteronomy 22:28 forces the raped woman to marry her rapist. My question to the writers of the Bible is why in the world would any raped female victim want to be in the same town, not the same bedroom !! with her rapist?.
Victim ordered to wed rapist
By Shaikh Azizur Rahman THE WASHINGTON TIMES July 19, 2005
BOMBAY -- Hard-line Islamic clerics in a northern Indian village have declared that a woman's 10-year-old marriage was nullified when her father-in-law raped her -- and ordered the mother of five to marry the rapist.
The fatwa, or religious edict, was issued by Darool Uloom Deoband, South Asia's most powerful Islamic theological school known for promoting a radical brand of Islam that is said to have inspired the Taliban in Afghanistan.
The decision has outraged both Muslim and Hindu leaders and prompted a fierce debate that has dominated the front pages of national newspapers across India.
The fatwa ordered Imrana Ilahi, 28, to separate from her husband and treat him as her son because she had sex with his father. "She had a physical relationship with her father-in-law, and it nullifies her marriage," said Mohammad Masood Madani, a cleric at the theological school. He said it made no difference whether the sex was consensual or forced. The village council then decreed that Mrs. Ilahi would have to marry her father-in-law. Feminists and liberal Muslims reacted with fury, staging nationwide street protests. But Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mulayam Singh on June 29 supported the fatwa, saying: "The decision of the Muslim religious leaders in the Imrana case must have been taken after a lot of thought. ... The religious leaders are all very learned and they understand the Muslim community and its sentiments." The rape took place June 4 in the village of Charthawal in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh, when Mrs. Ilahi's husband, Noor Ilahi, was away. When Mr. Ilahi, a brick kiln laborer, learned of the attack, the village court instructed him to divorce his wife. But Mr. Ilahi, 32, told his wife: "My father is dirty and you are clean. I still love you and I cannot desert you." Mrs. Ilahi, with her husband and five children, sneaked out of Charthawal and took shelter in Kukra, the village of her parents. Mrs. Ilahi received another rude shock when the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, the country's most influential Muslim umbrella organization, endorsed the punishment meted out by Darool Uloom Deoband. "The fact that the woman was 'used' by her husband's blood relative makes her [unclean] for her husband and there is no way she can be allowed to live with him," the law board said.
" ... Pakistani legislation, for example, defines both adultery and rape as 'sexual intercourse without being validly married' and does not draw the distinction that one is forced while the other is not. Under current Pakistani law, if a women is raped and reports the crime or becomes pregnant, she has to prove that she was raped. What constitutes proof in Pakistan is the man's admittance of the crime, or four witnesses who saw the man force her into having sex. If she can not prove this, she is charged with having an illicit sexual relationship with someone and is punished. Because of this policy, rape victims are punished for reporting the crime, and because men can get away with it, there has been an increase in rapes every year. ... "
" ... However, whilst condemning the practice of so-called “honour crimes” as un-Islamic, the same leaders (depending on their views) may condone the imposition of "classical" interpretations and penalties of Islamic jurisprudence (Sharia Law) enforced by the State for sex outside of marriage (such as the Hadd or Zina Ordinances in Pakistan, Sudan or Northern Nigeria). For example, on the 12th January 2002 Safya Husseini Tungar Fudu, a 35-year-old Nigerian woman, was sentenced to be buried alive up to the chest and then stoned to death for having borne a child out of wedlock. She was the victim of rape. Thankfully, following considerable international pressure (including members from the Equal Opportunities Committee of the Council of Europe), the Sokoto Sharia Court of Appeal allowed Safya's appeal. ..."
posted
Why don't you read it like this: prophets and legislators in a primitive near nomadsociety that are constructing rules for their people to abide by to prevent from chaos and channel opportunities for groups of people to live together productively? Those were the days. And now we have to adjust since our context changed. We can't make the perfect rules for all times. We need to have an ongoing dispute, inspired and knowledgeable people, we need to choose the people that can bring up topics of daily life for us in parliament and courts. We need to decide what is obligatory at all times (human rights) and what we need to change. What is it with trying to apply rules that will make everyone unhappy, miserable and nonproductive. I believe it is a Christian thing to call this 'the spirit'. We needed Jesus to show us how we can proceed. We need the bible to learn from these stories about our ancestors 'walking with God'.
posted
There are no laws in Saudi Arabia that protect women from gender-based violence, domestic violence, or marital rape. These acts are not accepted grounds for divorce, and one woman's testimony of violence is often not accepted as evidence against her husband. Women who report sexual abuse or rape, whether perpetrated by an employer or otherwise, are unlikely to find a sympathetic hearing with judicial authorities. Instead of protection from the perpetrator, women may find themselves accused of illicit sex. Usually the burden to prove rape charges is on the woman victim, who must produce all required witnesses. The only basis for a rape conviction is a confession or the evidence of four witnesses. Lack of government support services and shelters for women victims of domestic violence and the absence of proper laws discourage women from coming forward with such cases. No government policies or procedures exist for training police or hospital officials to identify and support women victims of violence, nor are there any legal guidelines to ensure that perpetrators of violence receive punishment and do not harass their victims.
posted
That is the scary thing about Islamism, people wanting you to go back to a primitive state of ruling that is not reflecting you're sense of justice and is hurtfull to people.
quote:Originally posted by LovedOne: ... And no, Christians don't only follow the "laws" of the bible....
This is the right anwer...We have the civil law and the penal law for punished the crimes.
Posts: 1414 | From: far away | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
This cultural phenomenon – that a family’s honor lies in the virtue of its women–exists in many countries today; Pakistan is one of them. Studies indicate that in Pakistan, when women are jailed for long periods of time on charges of zina, their families and friends are reluctant to help or even visit them, "as accusation of zina is a serious dishonor" (Patel 1991, 27). Even more disturbing, suicide is perceived as the honorable solution to the humiliation, especially sexual violation is involved. For example, when Khursheed Begum was raped in 1992, her husband and son "wish[ed] she had committed suicide," even after human rights activists explained to them that the rape was not her fault (Scroggins 1992, A10). This attitude lends itself easily to manipulation and the development of a tribal attitude where women’s bodies become tools for revenge by men against men. Indeed, increasingly in Pakistan, "[i]n cases of revenge against the male members of [a] family, instances have come to light where their women are violated" (Patel 1991, 36).
Even within a family, physically harming (even killing) women for alleged infidelity or some other embarrassment to the family—-often by some sort of burning–is an unfortunate tradition in the Indo-Pakistani subcontinent. And, as world human rights organizations have documented, "honor killings" of women suspected of sexual indiscretion, carried out by a male family member, are unfortunately not limited to this part of the world.
The Qur’an, however, has harsh words for the exploitation of women’s dignity in this way. As if anticipating the misogynistic tendency of society, the Qur’an first establishes that there is to be no speculation about a woman’s sexual conduct. No one may cast any doubt upon the character of a woman except by formal charges, with very specific, secure evidence (i.e. four eyewitnesses to actual intercourse) that the woman is disrupting public decency with her behavior. If such direct proof does not materialize, then anyone engaging in such a charge is subject to physical punishment for slander. (For even if the information is true, any witness who is not accompanied by another three will be punished for slander (Qur’an 24:11-17).
As for the public at large, they must leave her alone, regardless of the outcome. Where the public refuses to perpetuate rumors, responding instead that: "it is not for us to speak of" (Qur’an 24: 16-17) the patriarchal tendency to invest the honor of society in women’s sexuality loses force. In the face of any hint of a woman’s sexual impropriety, the Qur’anic response is: walk away. Leave her alone. Leave her dignity intact. The honor of a woman is not a tool, it is her fundamental right.
posted
Dalia you are out of subject...the title of the thread is "what's the punishment of rape in Christianity "...not in Muslim word, isn't it?
Posts: 1414 | From: far away | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The original poster wanted to point out that supposedly there is no punishment for rape in Christianity. (Whether this is correct or not I can't judge because I'm not familiar enough with the bible.)
But what's the point of this? No country takes the above quoted bible verses as a basis for laws.
Fact is: laws in most non-Muslim countries are far more protective of women's rights in regards to rape and similar crimes than laws in many Muslim countries, which – as I pointed out – are quite injust and discrimanatory.
So wouldn't it make more sense for someone who claims to be a pious Muslim to work on improving the actual situation in Muslim countries rather than criticizing something that's written in a book which plays no role in the laws of most countries nowadays anyway?
Posts: 2334 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Now was much much better then copy and paste something which has nothing to do with the subject Posts: 1414 | From: far away | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
Fact is: laws in most non-Muslim countries are far more protective of women's rights in regards to rape and similar crimes than laws in many Muslim countries, which – as I pointed out – are quite injust and discrimanatory.
So wouldn't it make more sense for someone who claims to be a pious Muslim to work on improving the actual situation in Muslim countries rather than criticizing something that's written in a book which plays no role in the laws of most countries nowadays anyway?
Islam was thre since 1400 years ago
At that time they had much right that was never seeen beofre, and at the same time, your women were drowned to death or burnt alive...
waht changed well, the eurpoean seeing the characterstic of the muslim, their manners, and so on..some were so effect that turned to muslim (ie spain)....
and others were inspired, and started to follow on, ie, give women rights, it took time, but eventually women have got better rights than before.
Either way Dalia, todays women rights, are all thanks to Islam 1400 years ago
So what has changed? well, in the beginning of Islam nationa use to follow the Quran more closely then they use to.
what does this mean? IT means when the Book Of God the HOly Quran is practice, there is peace, there is sense, there is a fair civilzation. The book came to mankind, non and muslim, you can see that you have benefitted from this, being whereever you are, having you own pc, house, wateva.. (a right of ownership prohibited to women) all thanks to islam (hence the name )
so, christainanty use to govern rules in the past, it never use to work out present day rules, are not based on the bible, or hardly any of the medivel laws....rather more islamic laws
before you open you you mouth and rattle on pakistan, dont get confused of a pakistani and a muslim (think back a few hundres years ago, and you will know)
posted
what is a muslim country where there are colored people
what are western countries ...shall we split the line across saudi arabia? that leeave morroco alefiar , tunisa, etc with *colored* people...or muslims....
Islamic Sharia is for mankind, it does not see east or west or north and south or black and white
quote: In regards to laws protecting women that is certainly correct. Good point.
well done, one person to appreacite what Islam done for you, good girl keep it up, and keep posting good links :
posted
I have never heard a more ignorant tread than this one. It really says a great deal of how stupid mr. Egypt is. I guess he has never been outside Egypt. I live in a christian country and we have NO laws that referes to the Bible. State/law and church are seperated in that area. Here in Denmark you go to prison fore rape - and the victims gets help.
Lets turn it arround. What is the punishment fore rape in some (most ?) islamic countries???? The often punish the victim fore being "unpure" and not a virgin. No man will marry her and some times the victims own family kills her because they feel ashamed of her. So nice family help and structure....... Let me hear your inteligent reply to that mr. Egypt
Posts: 1215 | From: Nowhere | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
did u even read the post above yours and and dalias please dont get confused with Islamic sharia (countries) and countries where muslim reside, and pick and choose wat islamic rules they choose to follow.
your lucky that religion and law are seperated in your country...i hear the denmakr waters are frezzzing
-------------------- -- here... [url=http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0955020700/qid%3D1133898517/026-7853042-0414807= Recommended...![/url] Posts: 2457 | From: U | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Dalia, you keep pushing it I have asked you a question and you didn't answer, do you think if a girl is rapped and while the man commiting rape she killed him, what would be her punishment ? if you think that she is innocent, then why in the name of god do you think that after she is rapped, the man should be sent free .. where is the sense in that .. Do you think if a man rapped you, you would ever forgive him and think that he deserves to live, if you think so, there are tons of women and there family whom think that the rapist should be evanscent from this life and I think they have the full right for that .. what is more inhuman than rape ..
Posts: 1022 | From: cairo | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
you said he should be prisoned, consequently he can be set free after a period of time
Posts: 1022 | From: cairo | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
In many states in the U.S., a man convicted of rape can get life in prison without parole.
Posts: 8794 | From: 01-20-09 The End of an Error | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TheWesternDebt2Islam aka Ki$$ aka K: please dont get confused with Islamic sharia (countries) and countries where muslim reside, and pick and choose wat islamic rules they choose to follow.
Hm ... wait ...
Comparing the actual conditions in "Western" countries to an Islamic ideal is alright in your book. At least that's what 90% of your posts are about.
But comparing the actual conditions in Muslim countries to the Islamic ideal is a big no-no.
How come?
Watch out, you're getting trapped in your own rhetorics.
Posts: 2334 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dalia: Comparing the actual conditions in "Western" countries to an Islamic ideal is alright in your book. At least that's what 90% of your posts are about.
But comparing the actual conditions in Muslim countries to the Islamic ideal is a big no-no.
How come?
Watch out, you're getting trapped in your own rhetorics.
Good point.
Posts: 8794 | From: 01-20-09 The End of an Error | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
I dont call westerner's muslim and i dont call the countries muslim people live in islamic.
My point? muslim countries and non-muslim countries have islamic moral.
This morale are human nature, infact, like giving equal right to men and women.
but, before islam this was not practice, Islam was a real eye-opener for every man in the planet at the time and now.
Islam is univerisal.
Islam came before humans.
Humans are naturally born with Islam.
"muslim" countried and "western" countries, in my book (of this day and age) are actually the same!!!!
There is no comparision.
What to I compare? I compare Islam and non-islamic way.
West is just a term i use for non-islamic. But i use it in a more polictial way. West I can mean counties like Europe and America, but there are many other non-islamic countries other then them, like brazil and part of africa, thay lie in the western hemisphere?
are you able to understand what I say, or shall i make it more basic ....
quote:Originally posted by Dalia:
quote:Originally posted by TheWesternDebt2Islam aka Ki$$ aka K: please dont get confused with Islamic sharia (countries) and countries where muslim reside, and pick and choose wat islamic rules they choose to follow.
Hm ... wait ...
Comparing the actual conditions in "Western" countries to an Islamic ideal is alright in your book. At least that's what 90% of your posts are about.
But comparing the actual conditions in Muslim countries to the Islamic ideal is a big no-no.
How come?
Watch out, you're getting trapped in your own rhetorics.
posted
first of all, just so that no one would think I made up the topic and fleed , I didnt post a reply right away because one of my family members died and so I have been busy. anyway I am back now , and regardless the insult that some members posted in here , I wont reply them personally. it is enough for me that I proved the point behind posting this topic which is christinaity isnt a perfect religion to be followed. since God puts a rule to follow then He must know it is perfect for His creatures and when His creatures CANT follow it then there is no way for this rule to be God's rule, which means the Bible isnt the Word of God. God tells christians in the bible if someone raped a single girl then he have to pay for his father 50 I assume to be dollars nowadays in America, then he force her to marry him. yet christians take the rapist and put him in jail, I would rather to put the bible in the trash first before putting the rapist in the jail.
Posts: 1201 | From: Egypt | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
So wouldn't it make more sense for someone who claims to be a pious Muslim to work on improving the actual situation in Muslim countries rather than criticizing something that's written in a book which plays no role in the laws of most countries nowadays anyway?
that's prove my point, this book should be placed in the trash since it doesnt play any role in the laws, it is supposed to be inspired so that people wont follow their own laws otherwise why God inspired it????????????????
Posts: 1201 | From: Egypt | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
How many Muslims follow all the laws that they should, and are punished accordingly?
Posts: 1283 | From: Cairo | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mr Egypt: I would rather to put the bible in the trash first before putting the rapist in the jail.
Most Christians don't take the Bible literally...they feel it is Divinely inspired and look at the large picture -- to treat your neighbor as you would want to be treated.
Because really, language (any language) is an *imprecise* form of communication; there is so much room for error.
I understand that you don't like Christianity, but it is necessary to be so disrespectful toward it? Posts: 8794 | From: 01-20-09 The End of an Error | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mr Egypt: God tells christians in the bible if someone raped a single girl then he have to pay for his father 50 I assume to be dollars nowadays in America
Sure, it's a well-known fact that if a rapist goes to trial in the US he usually has to pay 50 Dollars to the victim.
posted
First of all, Christians do not follow the archaic laws found in the Old Testament. These were the laws of the ancient primitive people thousands of years ago, and were never meant to govern modern Christians. Jesus said, "I give you a new commandment: Love one another. Such as my love has been for you" (John 13:34).
Jesus is the fulfillment of the Old Testament, therefore archaic laws from the Old Testament, no longer govern us. Modern Christians take Jesus' teachings as a whole and try to discern the central truth that he teaches, for we cannot be absolutely certain that the details are as he meant them. "Love one another", "do not judge", "agape." ("unconditional love").
Also, the religious community, according to Jesus, must have nothing to do with the state -imagine going to a Roman citizen circa 33 AD and asking him to explain the dividing line between the Roman state and the Roman religion. He would scratch his head in puzzlement. For the Roman, the state was the church, and the church was the state: the same entity performed both civic functions and religious duties. But if you had gone to Galilee at about the same time, you might have encountered a man who taught another doctrine - a revolutionary one.
This man, Jesus of Nazareth, when asked the question whether it was lawful to pay taxes to support the Roman state, replied: "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and unto God that which is God's."
He was not striving to achieve political autonomy for his followers. Instead, he was interested in creating an emphatically non-political community that he called the Kingdom of God -a community that would govern itself without recourse to violence, and in which money would be raised by voluntary contributions alone. In short, Jesus separated church from state, and assigned to each its own proper sphere and domain.
Posts: 375 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well said xx, with the emphasis on 'modern christians'. Of course we do have retro's among us too and even a small group that does want to have a state led by 'God'.
quote:Originally posted by _XX_: First of all, Christians do not follow the archaic laws found in the Old Testament. These were the laws of the ancient primitive people thousands of years ago, and were never meant to govern modern Christians. Jesus said, "I give you a new commandment: Love one another. Such as my love has been for you" (John 13:34).
another contradiction in the bible , thank you for posting it. if christians dont follow the old testament and Jesus gave them new laws as you calim he wouldnt say: Think not that I am come to destroy the law (the old testament), or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. matthew 5:17
Posts: 1201 | From: Egypt | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dalia: Sure, it's a well-known fact that if a rapist goes to trial in the US he usually has to pay 50 Dollars to the victim.
Man, you're hilarious!
I dont know the conversion between the silver the bible mentioned for the rapist to pay and the new currency today, you make the conversion and let me know how much he should pay for his victim nowadays.
I wonder why I didnt see a post from you to my topic No offense but how, just curious, you didnt read it? I thought you would come up with something since you reply all the time to such topics
Posts: 1201 | From: Egypt | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't see a reply from you to my first question in this thread either ...
And if you've followed my posts carefully you should also have noticed that I usually don't debate with people who mainly post copy and pastes from some hate sides (no matter whether anti-Christian, anti-Islamic, anti-Hindu or whatever) and show no real interest in serious disussion and exchange.
I'm just not interested in that sort of debate, I have better things to do than wasting my time debating with fanatics who want to argue about books they haven't even read themselves.
Besides, I got loads of work to finish this week ...
Posts: 2334 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr Egypt, Even in the Old Testament we learn that God does not want us to sacrafice our fellow men, he ordered Abraham to use an animal instead. And Jesus was the final sacrafice ordaining that we should retribute to God in asking for forgiveness for our sins. Since then gouvernments try to shift from physical retribution to re-education and a possible re-integration in society. As is the humane thing to do. Jesus fulfilled the law, we have to look at the law with the 'Pink' glasses of the holy spirit and act likewise. It is hard to come from you're literal horse I guess. Not-inspired/spirited but a reflex to avoid living with insecurities I guess.
You could fill this in with whatever book you want:
............... isnt a perfect religion to be followed. since God puts a rule to follow then He must know it is perfect for His creatures and when His creatures CANT follow it then there is no way for this rule to be God's rule, which means the .......... isnt the Word of God.
quote:Originally posted by bibo1978: still no answer Dalia
I'm really surprised that someone who's been reading my posts for a while would ask such a question.
Of course I think a woman who happens to kill someone who is trying to rape her should go free.
But I don't see the point of your question? What are you getting at?
I have mentioned the idea before yet here I am again. If she is free to kill'em while doing the rape why isn't the community free to kill'em after doing it, in fact she can kill'em while attempting to do the crime "before actually commiting it" but after he do it .. he is free to live he will just go to jail .. I hope I made my point clear for you Posts: 1022 | From: cairo | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
'Happens to kill him' is the key here Bibo. It is in the line of selfdefence, and even that is disputable in court, that she may kill him, not as retribution.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
)![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic