My blog has moved!

You will be automatically redirected to the new address. If that does not occur, visit
and update your bookmarks.

Sunday, 12 September 2010

Stoning: Hami Ramadam defends it because "it is dissuasive"

"Hami Ramdan was not moved really after 43-year-old Ashtiani was sentenced to death by stoning (the Iranian woman whose death has been suspended). The director of the Geneva Islamic center wants to "place this affair in its context". According to him, "the punishment of stoning is used mainly as a deterrent". He adds that "when a bomb explodes in a Muslim village on Iraq or in Afghanistan, that is not a deterrent, but the facts' reality". 
The intelectual points out that "this woman has been condemned because of adultery and murder". Or "the stoning is a very difficult punishment to obtain, as the judge needs four ocular witnesses. A condition that is nearly impossible to meet". Mr Ramadan concludes that "we should be cautious before judging this affair, and it's important to know the nature of the facts".
"Attacking Teheran because of this punishment is as a result a political act", according to him. "It's a pretext to attack Teheran", he explains. "It's true that the image of a woman crushed by stones is unbearable, but the bombings of innocents by donez of thosends is just a pure abstraction, specially if they are Muslims", underlines Mr. Ramadan. 
The difference, Mr. Ramadan, is that no one is defending the killing of innocents in the Western world and that in all wars there are innocents killed in attacks. It can't be considered equal the errors an Army makes in the course of war with the judicial process which ends in the stoning of a human being. Besides, there is no one saying that God wants them to be killed or have considered them as responsible as some Islamic jihadists have considered all non-Muslims.

Secondly, here we have (again) that line of thought by which only Western countries can kill innocents in Islamic countries, with no mention to terrorists, who of course, are also Islamic, so Mr. Ramadan prefers not to remember their participation in the slaughter of thousands across the world.

And thirdly, it's revolting that so unbearable a punishment can be used as "deterrent". Aren't there other ways to deter people from adultery, which don't end murdering anyone? Of course, without mentioning the crazy consideration of women (and sex with them) among Iranian ayatollahs...

This is not the first time that Mr. Ramadan has supported stoning:
These statements are not very surprising, if we consider that their author also wrote in an opinion peace in Le Monde on Sept 10th septembre 2002 that stoning is "a punishment but also a way of purification. It's forbidden to insult the culprit. After his death, we pray for him. That is what the prophet did for a woman who was acquitted after giving birth to an adulterous child, and whose repentance was sincere"."
So you kill someone in the worst possible way, and afterwards, you pray for him. Wow, that's truly just and fair. I have seen the light...

One would like to know who was really the father of that woman's child...

PS: Injustice against one single human being is also injustice.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be polite. I don't usually erase any comment but I will do if:
1.- It's spam.
2.- You're trolling.
Thanks for leaving your comments.