Modern life in Indonesia.

[aristotle]

Shariah law as practiced in Indonesia: Indonesian gang rape victim faces public caning | Fox News

 

[aristotle]

The prescient Winston Churchill made these observations on Islam's treatment of women well over 100 years ago. In today's hyper-politically correct environment, speaking such truths would make Churchill a marked man.

WINSTON CHURCHILL’S COMMENTS ON ISLAM -  All About Muhammad

 

[layoutshooter]

I wonder, what would happen to King Putz the 1st, AKA Bumbling Barry, after being caught in the biggest lie of the year, "If you like your policy, you can keep it"? How many wacks with the cane would that get him? I know WHAT it should get him, but he is "blessed" by the press so it never will be.

You are right, they would riot round the world if Churchill spoke the truth today.

 

[RLENT]

The prescient Winston Churchill made these observations on Islam's treatment of women well over 100 years ago.

Besides the rather obvious religious bigotry, your overall premise is logically flawed:

You seek to present the issue as "Islam's treatment of women" ... when, in fact, the punishment is apparently being delivered equally to both the woman and the man who were involved in an adulterous affair.

The focus and framing is what makes it obvious.

One can certainly decry the punishment as being inappropriate for the alleged offense ... unless one is of the opinion that spammers need to be summarily executed with a bullet behind their ear ...

Of course, if the two punishments are compared, nine swats with a stick seems relatively mild ...

 

[RLENT]

Shariah law as practiced in Indonesia: Indonesian gang rape victim faces public caning | Fox News

BTW ... the headline, while not entirely inaccurate is somewhat misleading ... because it appears to imply that the woman is being punished for being gang-raped, which she is not.

A more accurate headline would read:

"Adulteress faces public caning - Fox News"

But then, it is Fox News after all ...

 

[muttly]

Except that headline wouldn't describe the story either. The story is that they were both hit with feces and she was raped by eight men, but STILL faced punishment by caning.

 

[RLENT]

Except that headline wouldn't describe the story either. The story is that they were both hit with feces and she was raped by eight men, but STILL faced punishment by caning.

So ... a rapist rapes an elderly woman ... and then has crap thrown on him and is beaten up by some thugs - to include some form of sexual battery - because or his alleged crime or because they don't like the way the guy looks or whatever ... but he STILL faces punishment ...

Is that how the selective outrage works ?

 

[muttly]

In the OP story there isn't a direct victim of a violent crime. Different circumstances completely.

 

[RLENT]

In the OP story there isn't a direct victim of a violent crime.

No there wasn't ... but there was a victim of the crime of adultery ... even if she wasn't expressly mentioned ...

Different circumstances completely.

Nice try at dismissal and deflection but ...

a·nal·o·gy
əˈnaləjē/
noun

a comparison between two things, typically on the basis of their structure and for the purpose of explanation or clarification.
"an analogy between the workings of nature and those of human societies"


a correspondence or partial similarity.
"the syndrome is called deep dysgraphia because of its analogy to deep dyslexia"


a thing that is comparable to something else in significant respects.
"works of art were seen as an analogy for works of nature"

So ... does being the victim of a crime get one a free pass on any previous crimes one might have committed ?

A simple yes or no will do ...

BTW - was this the reason you deleted the link to the Mail article:

Three of the vigilantes were immediately detained and charged with rape as their companions fled - but that did not prevent police deciding to punish the woman with a caning for breaking religious laws. ...

Mr Ibrahim said the woman and her companion had confessed to having sex on several previous occasions even though the man is married and has five children. ...

 

[muttly]

I deleted the link because it wouldn't paste properly. That is the only reason. No deflection. I identified that your hypothetical involved a violent crime and a victim of a violent crime. The OP did not. Different circumstances, and it does matter with regards to punishment. I'll give you a hypothetical and tell me if both crimes will be handled the same way in this country. A drunk driver is pulled over by police. They decide to beat the driver because his is mouthing off. The second drunk driver,before he is pulled over, mows down a person that is walking. The driver is then beaten the same way. Are they handled the same? Is there even punishment for the first driver?

 

[muttly]

Is there still punishment for the second driver?

 

[RLENT]

I deleted the link because it wouldn't paste properly. That is the only reason.

Use the link tool (looks like a world globe with two chain links) instead of pasting it (directly into the reply box)

No deflection.

LOL ... then what happened to that yes or no answer to the question I previously posed ?

And why are your trying to obfuscate the issue that I raised by focusing on irrelevancies ?

Oh ... wait:

I identified that your hypothetical involved a violent crime and a victim of a violent crime. The OP did not. Different circumstances, and it does matter with regards to punishment.

It may be relevant to what specific punishment is meted out ... but it isn't necessarily relevant to whether or not one is punished ...

IOW: it's irrelevant to whether or not (later) being the victim of a crime somehow absolves one of being punished for crimes one has previously committed ... that is my point.

A point which you still have deflected on and avoided answering a direct question on.

It's kinda similar to how some are avoiding answering a question I posed elsewhere on the question of the rule of law.

Folks won't touch that one because they can't - they're either faced with 1. undercutting their own argument, or 2. showing themselves to be hypocrites (Yeah ... I'm all for the rule of law ... except when I want to violate it of course ...)

I'll give you a hypothetical and tell me if both crimes will be handled the same way in this country. A drunk driver is pulled over by police. They decide to beat the driver because his is mouthing off. The second drunk driver,before he is pulled over, mows down a person that is walking. The driver is then beaten the same way. Are they handled the same?

Under the law ... no, course not - at least in term what crimes the (drunken) perps would be charged with - but it's irrelevant to the point I was making.

As I said before, the point - which you are clearly avoiding by not addressing the question that illustrates the principle: one does not escape being answerable under the law for crimes they have previously committed simply because one later becomes a victim of someone else's criminal activity.

Is there even punishment for the first driver?

Depends ... probably largely on the specific jurisdiction, and who's involved.

In some instances I'm sure there is.

Once again, the issue I raised is not about a particular, specific punishment - it's about whether or not being a victim of a crime somehow absolves one of being punished for crimes one has previously committed.

It's really not a terribly difficult proposition to understand.

 

[layoutshooter]

Is there still punishment for the second driver?

Gotta beat the cop too.

 

[muttly]

Not sure on this one, but was Rodney King ever charged with anything the night he was beaten by police?

 

[muttly]

There still should be a punishment because there was a victim of a violent crime. To cane someone publicly for adultery after she had sewage poured on her and raped repeatedly it's just backwards, man.

 

[layoutshooter]

Not sure on this one, but was Rodney King ever charged with anything the night he was beaten by police?

March 3, 1991: After being seen speeding on the 210 freeway by CHP officers, King led them on a chase at speeds estimated at up to 110 to 115 mph. When finally stopped, King refused requests to get into the prone position and appeared to charge one of the officers. He was beaten and arrested. King was charged with felony evading. Charges were later dropped.

The Arrest Record of Rodney King

 

[muttly]

Thanks Layout. My point is there are instances where crimes are committed, and then are dropped due to 'other circumstances'.

 

[RLENT]

Not sure on this one, but was Rodney King ever charged with anything the night he was beaten by police?

You're still deflecting and avoiding addressing my point and the premise:

Does becoming a victim of another's crime, excuse one from being held culpable and being punished - under the law - for the previous criminal acts that one has committed ?

 

[Ragman]

Does becoming a victim of another's crime, excuse one from being held culpable and being punished - under the law - for the previous criminal acts that one has committed ?

This situation can not answered with a clear yes or no.

Criminals are routinely excused for their crimes when they can help in another case the prosecution deems more important.

 

[RLENT]

There still should be a punishment because there was a victim of a violent crime.

You familiar with the phrase "Lady Justice is Blind" ...

​

To cane someone publicly for adultery after she had sewage poured on her and raped repeatedly it's just backwards, man.

I am touched by your apparent empathy ... truly I am ...

Unfortunately, I seem to recall that it appears to be somewhat selective at times ...​