Muslims in Pakistan stand up for rapists' rights


#1

ONLY 10 days after Pakistan’s military-led Government reformed the country’s medieval rape and adultery laws, Islamabad appeared poised for a major backflip on the issue yesterday in an effort to pacify Islamic fundamentalists who have signed a fatwa against the historic changes.
Hardline Pakistani religious leaders have labelled the reforms “un-Islamic, immoral and unconstitutional” and evidence of “Western values infiltrating society”.

In response, Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz has authorised the Pakistan Muslim League to negotiate with religious scholars and leaders of the powerful Islamic opposition alliance, the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), over changes to the rape bill…
Negotiations over the bill follow two days of fury in mosques across the country, with Muslim priests leading attacks on the changes, denouncing them for their “Western values” and attacking those who supported the reforms.
Under the changes, complaints of rape and adultery will be dealt with under the country’s civil penal code rather than under an obscure Islamic sharia ruling imposed in 1979 that demands that four male witnesses testify before a rape charge can be proved.

**Reports said yesterday that as part of the attempt to curb the gathering campaign against the rape law changes, police and paramilitary forces had ringed the headquarters of the fundamentalist Jamaat-e-Islami party in the Punjab capital of Lahore, where thousands of protesters led by the MMA were gathering to demonstrate against the changes to the legislation.
A leader of the group said: “The MMA remains absolutely committed to stop these changes, and if necessary to bring about a change in the Government.”

jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/014275.php

Vickie :eek: :mad:
**


#2

i still do not understand this 4 witnesses idea. Who would rape while 4 people are witnessing? and if only 2 witnessed? if none witnessed?


#3

InJesus its pretty easy to understand. Its the perfect way to look like you are being fair and honest and law biding but you make such ridiculous premises that its impossible for any case to be enforced. What woman needs 4 men groping her to verify a rape? How about DNA? What exactly do these 4 men do? are they medical doctors? Do Muslims have an awareness of DNA?

I am serious here. Is it something they think is not as accurate as 4 men with no medical backround groping a rape victim?:confused:


#4

Is this the Pakistani equivalent of the ACLU? :rolleyes:


#5

Is this the Pakistani equivalent of the ACLU? :rolleyes:


#6

They would probably have a very short life expectancy :frowning:


#7

It is not just 4 male witnesses - it is 4 male witnesses of good character. So if the 4 male witnesses were of dubious character - their testimony would not count.

It does beg the question - if 4 men of good character happened to see someone trying to rape a woman, would they not act to prevent it rather than just stand there watching? And yes, who is going to rape anyone with any witnesses around, much less witnesses of good character?

I grew up in Saudi Arabia and I learned this when my brother was almost raped by a Saudi man when he was 12. My brother fought the guy off and saved himself. My dad wanted to take it to the Sharia court and prosecute but was informed that since there were no witnesses, other than my brother, it was not possible to prosecute. I’m not sure, but I remember being told that in my brother’s case, only 2 witnesses were required because he was male, that 4 witnesses are required to convict in the rape of a female.

Sharia law not only protects rapists but pedophiles as well.


#8

There’s one major flaw with the whole premise of this thread, and that is, that it doesn’t identify the people who changed the law as Muslims. The people who don’t want this law and who changed it are just as much Muslims as the people who are protesting.

Mukhtar Mai, a Muslim teacher who was victimized in rural Pakistan is one of the leading crusaders for women’s rights in Pakistan. She’s stated repeatedly that her faith, Islam, demands that she do this and she’s convinced that God will punish all those who victimize women. Here’s an article about her:cnn.com/2005/US/11/03/btsc.koppel/

Why don’t you choose Mukhtar Mai to represent Islam? Why do these other people get to speak for the religion, and not her?


#9

Well, I think the religious leaders have a point here. Introducing some semblance of justice into Sharia law would indeed be evidence of “Western values infiltrating (Islamic) society.”


#10

Well who are we to say she should represent Islam whereas the others should not? In Catholicism, we have the pope and the bishops to point to when showing others what they should believe about the Catholic Church, but what does Islam have? As far as we can determine from our limited understanding of Islam, these laws come direct from Sharia law and the Koran. So shouldn’t it seem to us that Mukhtar Mai is therefore a dissenter?


#11

Well, since you acknowledge that your understanding is limited…why do you conclude that Mukhtar Mai is wrong and the others are right?

Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to at a minimum, admit that you don’t know, and therefore, can’t really judge Islam based on this issue?


#12

Well, since you acknowledge that your understanding is limited…why do you conclude that Mukhtar Mai is wrong and the others are right?

Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to at a minimum, admit that you don’t know, and therefore, can’t really judge Islam based on this issue?

So if Sharia is reinstated because of popular support should we then assume that Pakistan is really not a Muslim nation and that that those that oppose Islamic law are actually the real Muslims?


#13

No, there’s another possibility:

Maybe that’s not actually the Islamic law. Maybe some people claim that something is religious law for purposes other than religious ones, and maybe some people get religious law wrong.

This woman certainly doesn’t think that this is what Islam requires. How come you don’t find her opinion (and she was a teacher of Islam) more authoritative than that of politicians’?


#14

Oh I have no doubt that the woman you’re speaking of doesn’t like Sharia. My best friend is an Iraqi and a Shia and he hates Sharia.

While I’m not going to argue with you about the finer points of Islamic law it seems to be that its placement in almost any nation is abusive. Why is it that it seems to be so widely misunderstood by its practitioners?


#15

You are misreading me. She thinks that the Shariah requires punishing rapists with the death penalty. She also does not agree that Shariah requires this kind of proof. Hence, she’s leading an Islamic campaign to bring the treatment of rape victims in accord with her faith.

Do you see the distinction there? She thinks that this treatment of rape victims is against Islam, ie, is contrary to the Shariah.

While I’m not going to argue with you about the finer points of Islamic law it seems to be that its placement in almost any nation is abusive. Why is it that it seems to be so widely misunderstood by its practitioners?

The point is that it’s not. It’s just that many choose only to focus on people who come up with bad interpretations of Islam, and selectively ignore anyone else or dismiss their ideas as “anti-Islam” or “against Shariah”, like you just did to Mukhtar Mai.

She says that Islam supports her cause. Who are you to tell her that she’s wrong and others are right?


#16

I’m not ignoring her interpretation and I applaud her efforts and wish her nothing but the best. What you’re not getting about what I’m saying is that you’re asking everyone here to ignore the negative and see only the positive about Islam. Yet that is hard to do sometimes when we religious leaders across a country call for support of rape and one woman who seems to be doing the right thing.

Now maybe you’ve got the right of it. Yet surely even you can see where that from our perspective it can be hard to see her as the rule and the religious leaders and protestors as the exception.


#17

Well, what I see here is people seizing on the negative and ignoring the positive.

If you don’t know what the religion actually teaches, it’s alright to say “I don’t know.” But this is a thread that says “the religion protects rape.”

Surely you can see how that is an uncharitable perspective, and on top of it, how it judges the religion based only on negative representations, right?


#18

:banghead:

i’ve got to research this…something is very wrong.


#19

Another example of a backwards society.


#20

Can somebody explain why the Quran, the scripture which contain scientifically accurate ideas, misses out on DNA? or ain’t we got him now?


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.