I am happy to respect the personal beliefs of individuals, provided they keep them to themselves and don’t force them down the throats of others. When a dictatorship masquerading as a “kingdom” uses so-called religious laws to punish victims of violent crime, however, I believe it is time to speak out in protest.
Most will already be aware of the Saudi woman sentenced to flogging for being in a car with a man who was not her husband, even though the assignation resulted in her being gang-raped. Some may try to condone the punishment as a breach of Sharia law.
Personally, I condemn it out of hand as a breach of common humanity.
The greatest problem facing this world today is a surfeit of dictatorial powermongers using any means at their disposal to wreak havoc on the weak and unprotected. Such is the case with the Saudi Arabian regime, whose tyrant king is kissed by American presidents and banqueted by British royalty.
The latest twist in this gruesome saga is an admission by the woman, no doubt under torture, that she was having an affair with the man she met, and because she dared to seek an appeal her sentence was cruelly increased.
A Saudi “justice” minister stated the woman had, “confessed to doing what God has forbidden.”
It may well serve the purpose of such powerful and wealthy degenerates to propagate the idea of a “God” so disgustingly cruel and malicious it can applaud the application of its rules in this manner, but here is one individual who spits with contempt on such ideas.
The Christian “God” has been equally perverted by its so-called adherents into a crazed, merciless, abomination with no regard for decency or humanity. The purpose of this perversion? To bestow power and control on those who strip the minds of susceptible individuals and fill them with fear and degradation.
This world is rife with cruel manipulation and populace control, from the very wealthiest monarchs to the local priests and pastors, imams and clerics. Their religion is a warped black shadow hiding the truth behind all great religions.
That truth is: LOVE.
Love is missing from the minds of these people. Where is the love and concern for the Saudi victim of that most terrible act of aggression against a woman?
Without Love there is no religion. Without Love there is no humanity.
Jesus said: “Love ye one another as I have loved you.”
According to a hadith, Muhammad once said: “A true believer is one with whom others feel secure. One who returns love for hatred.”
One who returns love for hatred.
King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, where is the LOVE FOR HUMANITY in your darkly self-righteous, religious heart?
Filed under: False gods
Dang straight it’s a miscarriage of justice.
Under Shari’ah law, if she was married and had an affair, she should be stoned to death.
I’m not sure much of this would be of the slightest concern to us, were not for our oil being under their (Saudi) sands.
Anan – where is the Love in that? It isn’t even basic justice. Less so than the concept of an eye for an eye. Any “God” who imposes strict laws without account of the frailty and imperfections of its own creation deserves neither respect, nor even acknowledgment. It is a mere tool of its gutless human masters.
Vigilante – if our concern for the wanton cruelty of others rests only on our own economic desires, what have we become?
RJ – you’ve said what I say myself, often.
“Love one another” the only three words needed for the world to progress. I’m no longer a church goer, and not even sure I believe in God or god. I do appreciate, though, that the words of a teacher, Jesus, were valuable.
Middle Eastern values today are incomprehensible to us, I can’t even begin to understand the way their minds work, or why they haven’t become more enlightened. Perhaps it’s a basic difference in their genetic structure.
What you’ve described is too horrendous to contemplate.
Love, compassion, empathy. Sharia has been twisted on the anvil of ambition.
So has US law. Why else imprison thousands of marijuana users, and yes, even dealers.
Great Post.
I am reminded, once again, RJA, of the three simple rules for World Peace (even without the Great Invisible Cloud Being in the picture!)
1. Everybody Eats
2. Nobody Hits.
3. There is no third rule.
I was sickened by both the Shar’ia Laws and also by the attitude of the U.S. towards the unbearably cruel interpretation.
There is a great expanded post by the Rude Pundit on it, if you can bear his incessant graphic sexual metaphors.
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/ See: 11/26/07
Surely the entirety of the basis of every religion can be boiled down to “Be nice to each other”? Everything else is just fluff, and, as we can see from so many cases can be twisted to suit personal agendas, usually causing misery in the process. (I always find it ironic that the people who have hurt me most are the ones who profess to be Christian)
All of the world’s ‘great’ religions have one basic thing in common. Though the wording differs depending on which religion one ‘studies’ – the message is constant.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Just for the record, I’m devout agnostic (lapsed Anglican, Christian).
However, and Twilight no doubt will understand this maybe better than most, I have not ever found a better model than the carpenter’s son from Nazareth.
If I found a ‘religion’ that preached only this man’s simplest of messages, even after all these years then I would probably ‘sign up’. At least untill the religious mafia moved in and did what they’ve done to mosdt religions over the centuries. That is, twist the whole relevant philosophy to further their own various, devious agenda’s.
Incidentally, have any of you heard yet about one of my fellow Liverpudlians being arrested, charged and locked up in a Sudanese jail? With the possibility of facing 40 lashes? All thanks to some loony-fundies of the Muslim variety?
Twilight – I’m not sure he West has become more enlightened, though perhaps less forcible means are used here to persuade Christians to part with their money. I believe one big reason the Middle East remains, in our eyes, less enlightened has been the forced repression by the West of large areas since WW1.
The truth is we don’t need religion. It is just a tool of subjugation. We are perfectly capable of civilized existence without all the baloney spouted by clerics of any creed.
Jerry – all designed to keep the common people in check, and the wealthy elite free to do whatever they choose.
WWW – Thanks for the link. Rude Pundit does tend to sift away the niceties, but in so doing he lays bare the bones of truth.
Jo – “Be nice to each other.” Isn’t that the easiest thing in the world to do? Wouldn’t you think so? I have a theory: homo sapiens is the first animal species to develop anything other than a very rudimentary self-awareness. It makes us so insecure we need others to support our ideas and belief patterns. That’s why we form religious groups. So strong is this need for security and reassurance from others, we are prepared to kill those who don’t hold our views. We developed the basic principles of “good” and “evil” as justification for these acts.
TOB – just for the record, I can’t put a name to what I am but I guess it’s closest to the Huna wisdom of the early Polynesians, though its roots go back much further. Like you I was taken against my will and forcibly christened in an Anglican church. I fought against it, but my being only two months old meant the vicar was much too strong for me.
You won’t find a better model than Jesus of Nazareth. He reduced the whole of the law to two commandments. Unfortunately, the Christian church developed by force and blood-letting, and bastardized it to the abomination we have today.
You say, if you could find a ‘religion’ that preached only this man’s simplest of messages you’d sign up. There is one. I can only say, look into your heart and you’ll find it there.
Yes, Gillian Gibbons is a lady who has my sympathy. I’ve been following her story with interest, and some concern. I considered writing a post, but really it would be an addendum to the above article so I decided against it. I have no wish to be considered a “Muslim-basher”. As I stated at the beginning of my post, I am happy to respect the personal beliefs of individuals, with provisos, and one of dearest blogging friends is of the Muslim faith. However, most Muslims are appalled by this teacher’s ordeal, and rightly so.
I have a theory: homo sapiens is the first animal species to develop anything other than a very rudimentary self-awareness. It makes us so insecure we need others to support our ideas and belief patterns. That’s why we form religious groups. So strong is this need for security and reassurance from others, we are prepared to kill those who don’t hold our views. We developed the basic principles of “good” and “evil” as justification for these acts.
Terry Pratchett,Ian Stewart,Jack S. Cohen put an interesting spin on this in one of the Science of the Discworld books (there have been three of them, and without having them to hand, I can’t remember which one it is in), which talks about social behaviour, and the need for an us and them attitude when we were first grouping together as a social community – when you want to protect your group, your genes (breeding rights) and in particular your group’s resources when your territory adjoins someone else’s, you will have to fight for them. It is a lot easier to hurt and kill someone if you don’t believe that they are really human (the dehumanising of the enemy technique persists today), and in order to know if someone is “human”, or “one of us”, you set up rituals – if the person knows that on a Wednesday you must hop three times round the fire before you eat your dinner, then he is “one of us” and can be tolerated. It is a lot easier to get a ritual accepted if it comes from a “higher being”, hence the inclusion of god(s). When the children of the group grow up, and move away to start their own groups, they will take your rituals with them, and so the religion spreads.
The idea of “good” and “evil” as definied by religions is not really much more than “us” and “them” – the morality codes are pretty much the same; “Do not kill”, “Do not steal” etc.
Apologies for the formatting above! I’d tried to italicise your comments, RJ, but it italicised the lot….
When you are outraged, do the words just flow or do you take time to pick and choose and rewrite? I’m just curious because your writing has a nice cadence. And yes, humans are the most dangerous breed.
Jo – “good” and “evil” equals “us” and “them” is an excellent analogy. Nowhere is this more obvious than in the world situation today. It makes one wonder whether we have really evolved at all. Incidentally, no need to apologize, your italics are fine. 😉
Flimsy – it’s not the first time one of your comments has inspired a post, so see my latest offering for at least part of your answer. In writer’s terms, first I try never to write while outraged. As my post is titled: “Don’t react; respond”, and response needs to be measured, so I generally wait till the rage is passed. I tend to write until roughly reaching a point where I need to decide where exactly I’m going. Often, I have only a tentative idea when I begin, unlike many writers who map everything out carefully before starting composition. Usually, I take time out to make alterations to bad grammar, syntax, etc at this time, though the final corrections are made just prior to publishing, and even occasionally afterwards, as I usually find some blemish that requires ironing out from the final draft. To paraphrase, I usually begin with an idea of what I wish to convey, but the act of writing will frequently throw up other ideas requiring expansion, and may occasionally effect the conclusion. I suppose it’s all rather haphazard really, but then writing’s such a personal thing, isn’t it?