No.

[xaritomene]

The Iranian government have neatly side-stepped the problem with the stoning and have reached a new decision: they're going to hang Sakineh Mohammed Ashtiani instead.

(link takes you to the original entry on xrysomou's journal - information based on this tweet by David Aaronovitch, of The Times

Comments

[whocares19_05]

This is so - wrong and unfair. I don't get it. This can't be happening.

surely the only useful purpose that it serves is as a deterrent
It doesn't even work as a deterrent because people who plan a crime don't think they will get caught, so it can't be a deterrent.

[xaritomene]

That's exactly it, you know? They're not deterrents. People say they will be and they're just... clearly not.

I don't understand this at all, and all I can do is pray for this poor women - which given the situation seems almost an insult.

[realpestilence]

All theocracies ARE terribly dangerous, even if they're not actively killing people to control the population-they all have the potential to do s, and have the culture fall in line with it.

At least in democracies, when the government kills people, there's potential for riots and backlash, and legally-driven change.

[xaritomene]

They are. They really, really are. Religion, like I said, is in the absolutes of good and bad which we have to recognise in real life cannot always be adhered to - and theocracies do not allow for these grey areas. And how can you possibly go against your government when they claim to enforce the will of your God? Just - no.

[neon_footprint]

This is why as a committed Christian, and a committed lawyer, I know the difference between my morals and the law.

Not only is this disgusting, it is an affront to international human rights. It is both immoral AND illegal.

Just say NO, Iran.

*fumes not very quietly*

[xaritomene]

Religion has no place in law, especially when that religion allows for something like this which is, as you say, an affront to human rights. They are clearly determined to kill this poor, poor woman no matter what. Can't stone her for adultery, hang her for murder. No. Not ever.

*fumes along with you*

[neon_footprint]

The important thing to grasp, as always, is that both religious law and secular law are matters of interpretation. The danger of theocratic dictatorship is that interpretation is suppressed, and it is done in the name of the god of the state. Sharia is no more black and white than christian law (which you and I would both aspire to follow to the best of our abilities, given human weakness), and here we stand, two women who are in parts condemned and in part accepted by both laws. Fundamentalism is the most dangerous kind of religion. It crosses religious and national borders, but it is always essentially the same. "I am RIGHT," it says, "I am CHOSEN; I am the sword and shield of the one true God." Yes, we must say to it patiently, and you are also human. You are fallible. You can be mistaken, even in your heart.Of course, that's the point when fundamentalism blows us up, but you get my point I hope. Islam no more allows for these desperate punishments than Judaism or Christianity do (similar law books, after all). It is the

[lullula]

It's wrong to condemn a whole country based on the actions of its government, but Iran makes it very difficult for me to say that =/

[calantha]

+1

What's messed up is that this isn't the only stoning case! Just two weeks after this particular woman's story went public, a couple was trying to run away together and were both stoned to death. Did anyone hear about that? Nope! That was a Taliban-ordered stoning in Afghanistan. A few articles are out there about it, but no international outrage.

[neon_footprint]

Point taken, but I consider that it's better to be outraged when you do know that human rights abuses are taking place, than to ignore them because they aren't the only ones. Human rights are infringed all around the world, every day. It is my position, personally and professionally, that one should fight these infringements wherever and whenever they come. Yes, that will lead to situations where we fight one case (like mrs ashtiani's stoning) where another has gone unnoticed (like the couple you mention who were stoned in afghanistan). But it is my honest belief that it is better to fight something than to do nothing

[calantha]

Oh I wasn't trying to imply any hate on Iran or that this case shouldn't be fought for at all. I just think that the general public needs to stop requiring a single face for a cause, and to be able to grasp the whole concept of what's going on.

[dimestore_romeo]

"This is why I will never stop feeling that all theocracies, no matter what religion, are dangerous."

They are. Every time they try to bring religion in to anything over here, I get terrified. For example, abortion is legal. It's important that it's legal, we are in a secular society, people have rights. If you are religious, then you may decide that you don't want an abortion because it's against your beliefs. Which is fine. But you have to have the choice. Personal religious beliefs can work within a secular society as long as they are personal only and not imposed on the masses.

/derailment

I'm completely horrified by this whole affair. I really hope that the sentence is not carried out.

[jusmine984]

I completely agree with you on abortion!

[xaritomene]

Personal religious belief is incredibly important to me, to the point where I've spoken before on this journal about considering priesthood and my own faith is a central part of my life. But "although I may not agree with what you say, I will defend to the death your right to say it". (for the record, I'm pro-abortion, pro-divorce and demonstrably pro freedom of sexuality.) My religious beliefs are my religious beliefs and I have no right or prerogative to impose them on you or anyone else - or to think that I am in some way 'better' for holding them. Choice is the important thing, freedom of choice and expression. That freedom of choice is so important, we can't prize it too highly, and it's one of the things that theocracies lack.

So, yes, I'm terrified when they try to bring religion into anything over here. I may live my life by a religious code (as far as I'm able), but a relationship with God is a personal thing, not something which can or should be state-regulated, any more than abortion laws (or any other kind of law) should

[dimestore_romeo]

"That freedom of choice is so important, we can't prize it too highly, and it's one of the things that theocracies lack."

Yes, this. :) I don't know, I feel that you have a very healthy attitude to your faith.