I have never read a more ignorant post.  The Black Panthers were never wiped out, and most are living and prospering today.  I know because I live near Oakland in California, and know several Panthers personally.  The Ku Klux Klan still exists, but do not kill black people.  Their illegal activities have been suppressed by the government, and it is even illegal to burn a cross with the intent to intimidate others, something the Klan is known for doing.  I think al_hamza makes up a lot of his "facts," looking at this and others of his posts.  In another letter he says that women in the West wear stilleto heels and dress laciviously, because they are considered sex objects here.  He knows little about styles in the West.  The fact is that women here are free to dress as they like, unlike in many Muslim countries where they must wear a scarf or other type of uniform.  If Western women want to emphasize their good looks, they are free to do so.  If they want to wear a burqua or simply "dress down," they are allowed to do so as well.  It appears that al_hamza is not ready for freedom of thought and appearance, and would like to deny such freedoms to others as well.  Let's hope his sort of narrow thinking loses out in the marketplace of ideas.
Jack Fulcher
California

Hi folks!  Hope you had a pleasant weekend.  Work is getting really busy, so I have been up to my ears in stuff.
 
I owe Waziri a response to his fine post.  I agree completely with your excellent point, sir, when you point out that Americans know little about the outside world.  This is sadly true, and you no doubt know much more about us than we do about you.  Before this issue about poor Amina Lawal, all I knew about Nigeria was that it is beautiful (which I have heard from friends who have visited), it has a high population, and that it has large reserves of oil.  I even had to talk with my colleague (one of our auditors and finance specialists) who is from a small town north of Lagos to get an idea of where Kano is and even how to pronounce the name.  America is a large country and, until about 1950, only the rich could afford to travel to Europe or Africa, so most of us did not think much about the worlds across the oceans.  Even after 1950, when people were starting to travel more, most of the travel from here was to Europe, not Africa or Asia.  I suppose the internet and, sadly, the attacks of September 11, 2001, will change this self-imposed isolation and disinterest regarding the rest of the world, and more and more Americans will find the outside world worth exploring.  None of us can expect to live in isolation any more.
 
You say that you are not opposed to science and technology, that you have used the advances yourselves.  I believe this is true, as we can all see by this excellent website.  However, I was not talking about just consuming the products of the West, using our computers, our medicine, and our machines, but participating in the discovery and development of these new technologies.  Many of our top scientists and entrepreneurs are from other countries, but would it not be better if you grew your own industries and worked WITH us in the progress of humankind?  Nigeria is in a great position to do this.  You get billions of dollars in what is essentially free money every year because of the oil and other minerals on your lands.  Not all countries are as lucky as you.  If you combine your great resources with hard work and study, you can become the envy of countries everywhere.  Why have the Japanese been able to grow such a massive economy when they have so little in natural resources?  The answer is that they educate their children and work “like ants,” as the French have said.  Their children work as hard as their parents at their studies, and parents insist that their children receive the most education they can.  The Asians in California are wealthy because they have a strong work ethic.  The Jews on our east coast also have become rich through study and working long hours.  There is no secret formula, just education and work.
 
Is this true in your own country?  I read another thread of posts on this website that suggests that the northern part of Nigeria is lagging the rest of the country in the participation in college education (if I read the analysis correctly).  This is not encouraging, but it is also not hopeless.  I would hope that you insist that your children receive a good education, and that you work with your children to help them understand their studies.  Only a well educated workforce will be prepared to work with the rest of the world.  I would love to read about the great strides made by Nigerian scientists in the fields of health and agriculture.  Would it not be great if the cure for AIDS came from Nigeria instead of the US?

I agree that Muslims once led the world of science, and that the Chinese once were great powers in science.  So were the Egyptians, the Greeks, and the Romans.  But this was in the past – what have they done lately?  The advances in the last few centuries have been created by Western scientists, using Aristotelian logic combined with Western scientific method and liberal ideologies.  You cannot live off of the success of your ancestors.  They were great people, but are gone now.

Maybe we are crazy to work so hard, and maybe we should spend more time with our families, but if we want a comfortable life with a lot of choices we need to create wealth.   I am always shocked to read of the work habits of the Saudis.  I read arabnews.com, which is put out by their government, I think.  They are a very lucky people, with tremendous reserves of oil just sitting under their feet.  Instead of developing and refining this oil themselves, they hire thousands of workers from other countries to do it for them.  The government tries to get their own people to take jobs in the economy, but they have been generally unsuccessful because the young Saudis do not have good work habits.  They come to work but leave before noon.  This is sad because all of this free money they are getting is being wasted on consumption.  Where are the great Saudi products, autos, and machines?  The only industry they seem to have developed is finance, which produces nothing for the people.  There is much gold jewelry, but little in actual production of things that people need.

Mr. Waziri, I know you are sincere when you say that Shariah will be enforced only on Muslims.  I believe that this is your intention.  However, the experience of foreigners in Saudi Arabia gives me doubt.  I know that SA is not your country, so maybe I am being unfair, but I can only relate what I have been told by those I know who have lived there.  There are for instance the religious police, who act like vigilantes and will hit you with sticks if you are found holding hands or if a woman dares to go outdoors without a scarf or male escort.  Good grief.  One woman told me that if she drove her car in Jeddeh, sometimes one of these vigilantes would step out into the street and try to stop her, but she would have to keep on driving, because she would be dragged out of the car and beaten if she had stopped.  Apparently women are not allowed to drive there, and the vigilantes want the women to know this!  What did the Prophet say about driving around town?  It’s clear that, at least in SA, foreigners are not safe from the dictates of their leaders’ interpretation of Shariah.

Remember what Eskimo reminds us when he quotes Ali Asghar:  “The words of Quran are DIVINE, but the interpretation is HUMAN.”  We know this is true because there are so many disagreements even among experts in the field.  This is true of all religions.  As has been said before on this board, Allah has given us brains and the power to reason for a purpose.  It is too easy to just believe what a particular group of clerics say.  It is not fair to them, either.  Imagine the burden of having a group of followers who believe everything you utter.  Would you not rather have them engage you with questions and conversation?

Mr. Waziri, we have obviously a few things in common, especially the tendency to write too much.  That is certainly true for myself!  Why do we do this?
Thank you for your elaboration of the circumstances that led to Amina Lawal’s unhappy situation.  To me it looks like she’s just a simple country woman who was taken advantage of by that guy, and then wanted someone to do something about it.  Instead of getting justice, she was hurt further by the police and the courts.  Not only that, the guy lied about it and they just let him go.  How can that be justice?  Why is it so good to lie under the Shariah laws, as al-Hamza has said?  Why is lying encouraged?  Your judges think they’re doing the baby a favor by allowing it to be weaned before killing its mother and making it an orphan.  Surely you must know how incredibly cruel and unjust this looks to the rest of the world.  I respect your goal of protecting genealogy, but if that were really the underlying reason for this, you would also kill the baby.  Certainly his continued existence sullies your gene pool.  I am glad that you point out that stoning is not something that has happened in your country recently, that this is a sensational case perhaps exaggerated by “the Media houses of the West.”  This gives me hope that perhaps reason will prevail and Amina will be released to live her life with her baby.  

You point out the impeachment of President Clinton as an example of how we, too, disapprove of unfaithful people.  And you are correct, that we disapprove of such activities.  However, the impeachment was not something that most Americans supported.  Clinton had lied under oath in a sexual harassment suit, saying that he had not had sex with Monica, and the opposition party (the Republicans), who controlled the House of Representatives, brought the charge of impeachment because he had lied under oath.  If you go back and look at the news reports from that time, you’ll notice that the Republicans voted for impeachment, and the Democrats (the party of Clinton) voted against it.  This was purely political, nothing more.  Most Americans said that he shouldn’t have committed adultery, but that it was not a serious enough crime to remove him from office (let alone kill him!).  His approval rating among the citizens was always very high, as he did a good job as president. And as you see, he was not removed because the Republicans in the Senate could not get a majority to vote for this.

You make a good point that Americans haven’t elected a woman as president yet.  The Europeans, Indians, Israelis, Indonesians, and Pakistanis all have done better on this particular measure.  I do not know why this is.  We will do so eventually, I am sure, as women hold elective office throughout our government; but a woman president here may be several years from now.  On the other hand, women who are raped here can go to the police and report it, and the MAN will be the one arrested.  If a man fathers a baby, he will be made to pay the mother child support every month.  We have many protections for women such as sexual harassment laws (e.g., if you make sexually suggestive statements to a woman co-worker, you can be fired from your job), affirmative action (women are hired before men in many cases, by law), and the divorce laws.  Change comes slowly, but we are trying to make opportunities for our daughters equal to those for our sons.

I agree that the West has acted callously toward your countries, and has exploited your resources and people.  No question about it.  But I disagree that we only interfere in your world when we have something at stake.  The US imposed economic sanctions on South Africa’s apartheid government because apartheid was wrong and we wanted to do something about it.  Was that “none of our business?”  Are the problems in Liberia “none of our business?”  Should we have intervened in Ruwanda to help prevent the slaughter there?  Were we wrong to have entered the war in Europe and help kill Hitler?  Was his treatment of the Jews and Gypsies there just an internal German issue?  Suppose Hitler had said, as EMTL said to me, “We have the right to choose (our beliefs) and practice it, period!”  

We have religious groups in America who keep to themselves and practice their religions, such as the Ammish Mennonites in Pennsylvania or the Christian Scientists.  However, they are still subject to basic laws that involve the protection of people.  For instance, the Christian Scientists do not use doctors but instead believe in the power of prayer.  However, there are some Christian Scientist parents who have been sent to jail because they did not provide medical aid to their dying children.  Was this “none of our business?”  We will not allow children to be killed because their parents are trying to “practice their religion,” no matter how sincere they are.  

I am not a very well educated man in such things, but I know of no passage in the Quran that says “thinking is not allowed, and you are forbidden to use your brains to reason.”  To those like EMTL or al-Hamza who say “stay out of our business,” I say that I am only the first person who will bother you like this.  I am saying this to you as a practical man trying to speak to a practical people.  You may not believe this, but I am a nice guy and you have no idea what others in are saying about this issue.  Check out this Yahoo.com message board regarding the Lawal case:  http://news.messages.yahoo.com/bbs?action=l&mid=&board=37138459&sid=37138459&tid=apnigeriadeathbystoning&start=1  There is a lot of anger expressed here, and it will only get worse if this woman is killed.  I do not trust my fellow Westerners to “stay out of your business,” and I expect that at the very least we will impose economic sanctions in the same way we did against South Africa.  This is not meant to be a threat, but you should know the reality that you face.  Several of the messages on the Yahoo board are disturbing to me, and I hope you do not dismiss them as “Western arrogance and colonialist attitudes.”  You can label them however you wish, but they are reality and they will not just go away.

I am suspicious of those who say “leave us alone.”  They sound like they might depend on religion for their living.  We have similar clerics in our own “religion industry” in the US, and it is very important to them that their followers do not question them.  They say that the Prophet has said this and that, and that it means thus and so, and so that settles that!  There are some here who like that approach to life, who are very uncomfortable if they are questioned about their religious beliefs.  In short they want to be told what to do, and if someone says “but what about this…?” they shout “apostacy!” and do the questioner harm.  Are your leaders doing the best for you?  Are they open in their minds and attitudes, and willing to take suggestions from their people, or do they say “do as I say, or else!”  We have some like that in the US, like Ashcroft, but luckily our courts will not let him get away with everything.

I am sorry that I have written so much.  Peace to you all.  Jack

Yes, Kalishi, we have death penalty in US, and I think I have discussed this elsewhere in this topic.  We kill those who have murdered and have done so in such a horrible way, and without much remorse, that some jury decides that they are beyond saving.  McVeigh is another who we have killed.  This killer in Florida said that he was proud that he killed, and would kill another doctor if he were allowed to do so.  We do not kill very many (compared with countries such as China or Iran), but we do it.  We kill with drugs or lethal gas, usually, although some states still hang or, in Utah, they sometimes use firing squad, although they are getting rid of that method this year.  No stoning, however.  We never had that method here.

I think I support the death penalty for these extreme cases, although "life in prison without possibility of parole" could be another option if we're worried about whether this person might kill again.  There's a big debate here regarding whether the justice system works well enough to be sure that the convicted person is actually the guilty party.  That is, DNA testing has shown that many awaiting execution did not actually commit the crime.  They were convicted in 1990, for example, but the science of DNA testing wasn't very good then, so it couldn't be used.  But if the crime was rape and then murder, for instance, the bodily fluids found at the scene were stored and, in 2003, tested using DNA technology, and it has sometimes been found that those fluids did not come from the man convicted of the crime.  This is another miracle of science, as far as I'm concerned.  If he had been executed in 1990, we would have killed an innocent man.

I want to respond to Waziri's excellent and erudite post (not to mention Eskimo's), but need to get back to work (it's 1 PM here).  I will check in later.

Pleasant dreams.  Jack

Oops!  Looks like Dave snuck in there while I was typing.  Hi, Laddie.

Hey, what's the problem with using apostrophes?  I keep getting some garbled stuff, and it's always the same.  Admin folks, can you fix this or suggest something to us?  Thx

What a great post by "Guest!"  An intelligent woman speaks out!  She and Ummita have both contributed well to this discussion.

I appologize, Ms. Guest, for my arrogance and brashness when I first started to post on this wonderful board.  I was very angry, as you probably could tell, having read about this poor woman and her peril.  To kill someone for having sex outside of marriage, in the 21st century, just "blows my mind."  I found an article written by a teacher at a local Kano school, but couldn't find any way to send him an angry rebuttal, but instead found this board (put together by the students??).  I realize that I just blustered my way in here, and I'm sorry for that, as most have been reasoned and polite even though most (but not all) disagree with me.  

You make a good point about the arrogance of Westerners, but in our defense I think that we truly believe that we've discovered the way to solve the problems that have plagued mankind for centuries.  For the most part we are well fed, live in comfortable houses, have good health and live long lives, and have freedom to choose careers, family, hobbies, long vacations, travel, etc.  In the 1800s we had large families because we needed our children to work on the farm, and it was not uncommon for two or three of your children to die from health problems.  That is rare today, so our families are much smaller.  We don't have to work as long as we used to, our autos give us mobility they never dreamed of in the 1800s, computers and telecommunications have allowed us to solve problems, collect and disperse information, and entertain us in a way the world has never known.  And one more thing:  We're a happy people.  Don't let anyone tell you that we're not happy.  In the words of dfynest, we’re living la vida loca (is he really Rickey Martin??)  We argue and fight among ourselves, but this is just part of the system we have.  Free speech is an experiment we’ve been trying for a couple of hundred years, and we like the results for the most part.  Sometimes we’re insulting, we say bad things about Bush and the knuckleheads who work around him, and we question long held assumptions, but this is the way things change.  It is the scientific method, and it works to get people to think about problems, approach them from a fresh perspective, and discover answers they would never had found if they had stuck with traditional ways.  How many things do you take for granted in your own lives that were developed by our methods?  Certainly this internet that allows us to talk to each other from around the world is a product of our systems.  We produce food and products for the world, yet do not have the oil resources of a Saudi Arabia or the mineral resources of an Africa.  

Al Hamza will say that this is materialism, and he is right to a certain extent, but we are also solving problems that we all want solved, problems of disease, discomfort and want.  Is this not what the Prophet was trying to do when he told his followers how to live?  Much of the Qu’ran contains practical ideas concerning health, education, families, and social organization.  Same with the Christian bible.  And the Talmud.  We think that we know how to solve many of these problems, and are proud of what we’ve accomplished in the 20th century.  In this century we expect to extend life beyond 120 years, to conquer many of the diseases that kill us now, like cancer and heart disease, to have clean water available to every person on the planet, to give all college level educations, and to be able to travel half way around the world in an hour or two.  
Don’t you want this for your children?  Don’t you want to participate in the progress of the world?  Or do you want to be just left alone so that you can kill your people for having sex?  I guarantee you, folks, the world will continue to watch this sort of atavistic behavior for only so long, and then it will be stopped if you don’t stop it first.  Already this very extreme interpretation of the Shariah is under attack, not only from the West but also from other Muslims.  The posts on this board have made it clear that there is disagreement regarding whether this punishment is something actually sanctioned in the Qu’ran.  And as I’ve said before, if your leaders ever start to kill men for the same activities, the clerics will start to find reasons to interpret the Qu’ran and the hadiths as saying that death should not be the punishment.  The men run the world, and especially your world, so they won’t put up with this if they are the ones being stoned.

And speaking of stoning, did you take a look at that tape smuggled out of Iran I gave the link for a couple of posts ago?  I had a hard time sleeping after seeing it.  And please don’t say something like “that proves that stoning works – you’ll think twice before breaking the law, won’t you?”  The death penalty is not a deterrent, as I mentioned before.  We’ve never been able to show a statistical correlation between the death penalty and murder.  People who kill do not think about punishment at the time, they’re too angry and they always think they’ll get away with it.  Quite frankly, and I know I’ll insult some here, stoning is barbaric.  I support the death penalty for some extreme murders, as I’ve said here before, but kill them with drugs.  Burying someone in the dirt while having a bunch of kids throw rocks at their head (look at the tape – they look just like a bunch of little boys out having fun) is unnecessary and debases your culture.  The Christian bible mentions stoning, but the West moved beyond that centuries ago.  You don’t need it, and it hurts you to use it.

I’d like to answer al Hamza’s comment regarding the deficit for the California state government.  Why do we have a $30 billion deficit?  Remember, this is only the deficit for the government, not the economy.  The California economy is the eighth largest in the world.  We’re doing great, thank you.   The reason for the deficit is the same reason we had a $100 billion surplus in 1999.  The tax system is based mainly on the income tax, which has progressive rates.  That is, as your income increases, you pay a higher percentage of it to the income tax.  So when the economy grows by 5%, tax revenues to the government will grow by maybe 10%.  Similarly when the economy declines, as it has in the last two years, tax revenues decline by a greater percentage.  When the economy recovers, and it looks like it might be doing it slowly now, the deficit will disappear.  

Once again, I apologize to Ms. Guest, who writes beautifully and with precision.  One objection that I have, however, is that I was talking about rape, not adultery, when I mentioned the four witnesses.  My understanding, and please correct me if I’m wrong, is that a woman needs four witnesses if she wants to report that she has been raped.  If not, she is the one punished.  If my understanding is correct, or even close, it sounds like the woman who has been raped is unlikely to get justice.  Why do you want to treat your sisters or daughters in this way?  Do you men just want to run things, have your fun with them, and suppress them forever?  If you love them, you will make it easier for them to get justice and participate as equal partners in your homes, your work, and your social lives.

Where’s Dave?  I sure seem to write a lot – too much coffee.  Sorry for rambling.  Peace, Jack

Hi again.

Our new friend Hauwa makes a good point about civility.  I doubt that the Prophet would make fun of his opponents, or engage in personal attacks when debating an issue.  I hope that I have been respectful, and if I haven't I apologize.  I do disagree, however, that discussion is useless.  I myself have gone through several opinions regarding the death penalty in my own country since I was young.  I was strongly opposed 20 years ago, but I have come to agree that there are some so hopeless and who have killed so viciously and without remorse, like McVeigh, or the man who they executed today in Florida (Paul Hill, if I remember correctly) who killed the doctor who performed abortions, that it is reasonable for the soceity to demand their deaths.  So I guess today you might say that I am in favor of the death penalty for those who kill several people, and who show no remorse for their acts.  We also have the death penalty for those who are hired to kill someone.  But generally we just send murders to prison, often for the rest of their life without possibility of parole.

And al Hamza, I don't know where you thought I said that we don't execute murders in the US.  We don't execute for lesser crimes, but the most vicious and hopeless of the murders are still executed here.  Europe has stopped executing people, and maybe our friend Dave Hill can shed some light on this.

This last example brings up a point made by Dave Hill in an earlier post.  He points out that the death penalty has not been shown to be a deterent to murder.  This is true.  Many studies have been done in my own country that have shown that there is no correlation between murders and the imposition of the death penalty.  I suppose the one exception might be the crime mentioned above - murder for hire.  But usually those who kill do so out of anger and without thought of the consequences if they are caught.

Ummita, what a fresh voice!  I am glad you joined our happy group!  Let's hear from more of the women who read these posts!  I think your point is a good one:  Why are they killing this poor girl, but are letting the louse who got her pregnant go free??  I think we both know the reason:  If the authorities ever started to kill the men for these acts, there would all of a sudden be pressure on the clerics and academics to find some reasons in your holy writings to let them both live.  The men in your country wouldn't stand for it!  In my country we say "It's a man's world," and that's true everywhere.  I hope that your country will try to treat men and women more fairly, and with justice.  The laws that say that a woman who gets raped had better have several witnesses, or else just shut her mouth about it, are unjust, no mater what anyone else says about it.

It sound like Amin is saying that the Prophet would prefer his followers to lie than to confess to a sin.  Is this true??  I confess that I don't understand Islam the way that you do, but I can't believe that lying to avoid prosecution is the true Muslim way.  Is this any way to structure a healthy society?  Please tell me that I misunderstand you.

Waziri, you are erudite and apparently well versed in your subjects.  I commend you.  I do have a few questions about what you have said in your recent posts.  You accuse me of "mischief," but I do not understand this.  According to the Shariah laws, mischief has to do with the destruction of property (you kill animals, poison water supplies, damage buildings, etc.).  Please see http://www.zamfaraonline.com/sharia/chapter10.html which defines the term "mischief."  If you mean that I mean you harm, I assure you that that is not the case.  Are you so unsure of your convictions that you would want to prevent all argument or criticism?  That's what al Hamza sounds like.  "Please stop talking to us and leave us alone!  I'll never change, so just go away and let us stone our women as we please."  That won't work any more, al Hamza.  The world has changed, and you can't hide in your little corner of the world and do as you please.  

I don't believe that Muslims are as isolationist as you appear to be.  Waziri points proudly to the example of a conquering army exchanging prisoners for books.  This is more like the Muslims I know.  One of my colleagues is from Nigeria, a Muslim, and is thirsty for knowledge and new ideas.  He and his family will do well in this world, because he is intelligent and works hard, and is constantly learning.  He never says "Leave me alone and don't talk to me.  I already know all that I want to know."

I think that Waziri gets off the track, however, when he tries to blame the outside world for the problems of his country.  Science and Western ideas seem to be his enemies, but science built this internet, science is putting food on our tables, and science is keeping us living to 100, when we lived only to 70 or so when I was young.  Science is not our enemy, it is our tool to use for our benefit and for the benefit of our families.

I am really enjoying the posts of Eskimo, lionger, and Waziri.  They are all intelligent and I am learning much about Islam from them.  Are you all from the same school?  I really don't know much about how this web site came about.

I am disturbed by some of the sentiment regarding death.  Are you serious that death might be preferred to life?  There's an old country western song in the US that goes:  "Everyone wants to go to heaven, but no one wants to die."  To throw up your hands and say "Well, life is tough and maybe she would be better off dead" is pathetic.  Life is to be lived, and you should not give up no matter what.  I know that your Prophet would not support this sentiment.  At least I hope so.

Bye for now.  I agree with those who say "let's hear from more of the women!"  They must have intellegent contributions to this topic.  And let's hear from the lurkers, too.  Ta ta.  Jack

Hello to all!  

I had a nice long weekend and when I got back I checked this board, and already we have three pages of posts!  A lot to read on such a hot topic.  I agree with Bashir that why would Allah (or God) give us brains if He hadn't intended us to use them and question everything?  This is a good mental exercise (for me, at least), and just think that it is all because we have the internet.  Ten years ago we would not have been able to have this discussion, but now here I am, some old white guy sitting in California talking with interesting, intelligent people from Africa and Scotland.  I think this is the most amazing development of science during my lifetime (right up there with putting cheese in an aerosol spray can).

I respectfully disagree with al Hamza and, to a certain extent, Waziri, who say that we should leave them alone.  Al Hamza says that we all just disagree on these issues, and that we have no business trying to discuss them.  Amin has expressed similar sentiments.  This sort of discussion was what the internet was made for in the first place.  Information, ideas, answers to questions, cooking recipies, even pictures of your new baby can be transmitted around the world in a few seconds.  Isolation is becomming harder and harder.  The kind of isolation Al Hamza and Waziri desire is no longer possible.  This is one of the reasons I sought out this sort of forum.  If you look at the Yahoo.com website, you can find plenty of chat rooms that are talking about this and other international issues, but they are all Westerners.  I already know what they have to say (and I am ashamed to say that some of the comments about this particular issue are pretty insulting.  They sound like a little al Hamza, but with a Western bias.).  (Sorry, a-H)  But the Kanoonline.com forum is refreshing in that you have expressed your views for the most part intelligently and with grace, and have made me feel welcome.

Sorry to ramble.  Too much bridge makes my brain boil.

Bashir also made an interesting point regarding underlying goals of society, and Waziri touched on this as well.  Bashir suggested that there is a tension between what is good for the individual, and what is good for the society, and this may help to explain differences in viewpoint on this issue.  I tend to agree with this.  All of life is an experiment, especially when it comes to how people should behave.  This is why we have sought out laws and religions.  In Europe all of the decisions were once made by the church and the king (or local leaders).  People didn't think they were actually separate from the church, and did not question the teachings or decisions of the church.  What they did for a living was dictated by tradition, they married whomever their parents chose, they lived in the same village in which they were born, and they never changed.  What was produced and consumed was dictated by the church or king.  This was necessary for the continuation of the village and no one questioned it (or if they did, they were stoned or burned).  

A few hundred years ago Europeans started to think differently, and started to make their own decisions.  They found that if they made their own decisions about what to do, where to live, and whom to marry, the world didn't end.  They created free markets, production was determined by what everyone wanted and were willing to buy, and economic growth increased substantially.  

There were tradeoffs, of course, as there are for any decision.  For instance, if you didn't work you had to starve (this was before there was a lot of welfare for the poor).  You might make bad choices about career or family, and you had no one else to blame for them.  People sometimes feel insecure if they don't know what to do with their lives, like they often feel in college.  If they lose their job, they have to find another one and that is very hard and often takes a long time.

On the other hand, the benefits of economic development from these new markets tend to give people a lot of choices in their lives.  I've lived in several states, each time with a good and interesting job.  You say that there is a lot of crime, but I don't notice it.  San Francisco is a safe place to live and walk around, even though there are small parts of the city that are probably less safe as they are poor and crime is higher.  This is true of any large city, and we all learn where not to go.  I've never been robbed and none of the women I know have ever been raped.

My point is that there are tradeoffs between the interests of individual freedom and development, and the individual's subservience to the society or state.  I guess this was the big thing about Communism, where decisions were still being made by only a few centralized people.  It seems that Communism, with all the best intentions in the world, just couldn't produce for its people the way free markets can.

Waziri says that Islam doesn't seek freedom and liberty, that obligation and duty to society is the right goal.  He argues that under Islam man is already free, that it is not necessary for individuals to be free in the same way they are in the West.  I can't believe this.  This sounds more like the "freedom" experienced by the slaves my country once owned.  When the slaves were first set free in 1865, many chose to stay with their former owners since it was too hard to go out and make their own way for most, and many said that they had a better life as slaves.  It took years of struggle by the former slaves and their descendents before they were able to develop the large middle class they have today.  

Would Waziri have them stay as slaves, to have all their decisions made for them?  The Muslims I know are not slaves.  They all desire what we all want - a comfortable life, an interesting and rewarding job, and a better life for their children.  That is my goal, Mr. Waziri.  The reason I first came to this forum was to give my opinion that, if this is the goal of Nigerians, and I believe it is, that some of the very extreme things they are doing, such as stoning women who commit adultry, will interfere with this goal because they cannot isolate themselves like this and still develop economically.  I will not open a branch of my business there because my female workers will be at risk from such harsh Shariah laws.  The men will, as well.  I understand that you allow men to violate your laws, such as the law against alcoholic beverages, but I could not take that risk.  Similarly, when my wife and I travel, we would not even consider a trip to your beautiful part of the world.  I would not want to subject her, or myself, to such risks.  I know this is the attitude of the typical Westerner.

Speaking of stoning, I saw a tape of someone in Iran being stoned.  I found it at http://www.iran-e-azad.org/stoning/video.html .  It apparently had to be smuggled out of the country.  If they are so proud of their enforcement of such laws, why don't they broadcast it to the whole world?  Are they ashamed?  Are they afraid that foreign investment or tourism will be impaired?

I've been writing this for over an hour, but must catch up on my work.  I'll pick up from here tomorrow, if you allow...

Peace, Jack

I'm here, Mr. Hill.  Just got back from a bridge tournament and am very tired.  I just scanned the new posts and am very interested in what everyone is saying.  I hope we can keep the discussion civil and not call each other names and impute bad motives to others writings.  In any case, it's very late and my wife and I am tired, so will respond tomorrow.  Jack

Hi everyone!  This has certainly been an interesting discussion.  I am hopeful, after reading some of the posts, that there is a bright future for beautiful Nigeria and that its students will be able to lift the country out of poverty through their thoughtful leadership.  My primay point for my initial post was one reiterated by Eskimo, that unless muslims reject the extreme teachings and practices of some of their clerics, the Taliban, and bin Laden, "they will remain in the background in the affairs of this world."  You are certainly free to stone women and amputate thieves, but the world is watching you and investors will not be interested in your country and tourists will shun you.  You might argue that this is of little interest to you, that you prefer isolation and care little for economic development, but I really don't believe that.  You do, after all, send your brightest students to study in the West, and I know that this is because you want your lives, and the lives of your parents and children, to be better.  This will not happen if you continue to tell the world that you wish instead to live in the 7th century.

I say that I am hopeful, and this is even after reading the posts of al Hamza and Babatunde Eko, which are personally offensive and, frankly, childish.  They at least are willing to participate in a dialogue about their country and future.  This is very important, as many young people are just not interested in discussing politics or social problems.  

I will try to address some of the points made in the last several posts (I need to go soon as this is our "Labor Day" weekend and one of our national holidays).  First, I am appalled that you, al Hamza, support Saddam (or as you call him, "His Excellency General Saddam").  This guy killed more Muslims than any other person in history.  He butchered the Kurds, often using chemical weapons on them, and then butchered the Shiites.  As a Muslim you should be happy that he is gone.  I never have understood why other Muslim countries stood by why he was killing so many of his own Muslim people, yet are so quick to criticize the US when they do the work of removing him.  I personally did not support this war and have no use for Bush (I'm a Democrat and voted for Gore), but you must admit that the world is a much better place now that Saddam and his murderous sons are out of the picture.  You're welcome.

You also make several more points that have nothing to do with the topic, such as problems in the US or problems with Israel, but the "Advisor" makes a good point that this has nothing to do with the issue at hand:  whether it is reasonable to take the life of this young woman because she has committed adultry.  I will say, however al Hamza, that my mother is 82 and does not date, and if you come over to her house she will probably kick your butt.

Some here have made the point that crimes should be punished, and what better punishment is there than to kill the person?  Certainly this will teach them a lesson.  Excuse my sarcasm, but the general argument that harsh punishment is needed to deter criminal behavior is good up to a point, but you could use the same argument to say that you should be killed for even simple traffic violations.  It is not sufficient to say that there is less theft now that you've started to amputate arms - of course there is.  Why not just kill the thieves?  That will reduce the crime rate, certainly.  No, you must balance your desire to reduce crime with the interests of justice and fairness for your people.  These sorts of punishments were abandoned by the civilized world many centuries ago.  In my country, we punish petty theft with time in prison, and if the crime is violent (like using a weapon during the theft) the punishment is several years in prison.  We have the death penalty, but it almost always applies to multiple murders.  In California, if you commit three or more felonies, you get life in prison.  I consider this harsh, but my point is that there are ways to deter crime without amputations or killing for such things as adultry.  

I'd like to quote from something I found elsewhere on the Kanoonline.com web site.  This is from an article written by Ibraheem A. Waziri at http://www.kanoonline.com/cgi-bin/articles/template.php/iaw010.txt.  He relates a story about the Prophet who had to judge a common problem:

"The son of one slept with the wife of the other. There and then our beloved Prophet ordered that the son be caned and exiled for one year and summoned Unais Al-aslamiy to go and ask the wife, with clear instruction to stone her in the event of her confession. So she confessed and so she was stoned."  One of the things that disturbs me about this quote is that the writer made no comment.  Does he not see the injustice of the treatment of the individuals here?  The man was beaten with a stick and exiled for a year, while the woman was killed.  Muslims profess to love their wives and daughters, yet seem to think this sort of "justice" is just fine.  They say that Westerners do not respect women because they are allowed to wear clothing that reveals their faces, arms and legs, yet if a Muslim woman is raped, she cannot have the rapist punished unless there are four male witnesses who are willing to testify for her.  If she reports the rape, and if she cannot get four men to speak for her (and how often is there even one witness to a rape?), under Shariah law, "she’ll be convicted of false testimony and sentenced for having intercourse outside marriage."  (From the same article)  So this means that a raped woman had better just shut up, or she'll be killed under this law.  It looks to me like you just want men to have their way with women, and if they complain they'll be executed.  Do you not love your sisters, mothers, daughters?  What sort of world are you creating for them with these sorts of laws?  Can you see how the rest of the world is appalled at your implementation of Shariah?

Eskimo and Mr. Hill make good points when they say that the laws of Islam should be applied with judgement and flexibility.  The Christian bible also talks of stoning and harsh punishments, but even the most fundamentalist of Christians realize that these punishments are not appropriate for the modern world.  Our punishments are designed to both deter crime and balance the freedoms necessary for a happy and productive society.  These are the goals I am sure you all want for your families and descendants.  Please don't isolate yourselves from the rest of the world.

Have a lot more to say, but have to go.
Peace.  Jack Fulcher

Amin, thank you for your response.  There are several points I'd like to make.  First, if the school can afford a web site, it can afford at least one e-mail address.  Further, if the school needs funding, you all should join the rest of the world and make some money.  It appears that you are doing your best to isolate yourselves, and then complain about how your problems are everyone else's fault.  

I fail to understand your argument regarding draconian laws. You say that the Sharia laws are "duly passed by legislatures working under the guidance of a sovereign nation's statutes."  So what?  The laws of Nazi Germany or Stalin's Soviet Union were created in this way, but were some of the most draconian the world has known.  Saudi Arabia has some of the most notorious laws the world has ever known.  There is no comparison between the Sharia laws, with penalties such as amputation and stoning, and the Patriot Act, which is conservative by US standards, and which I do not personally support, but simply gives the government more power to collect information from citizens and, especially, non-citizens.  No one is killed or amputated.

I also do not understand your reference to Brian Regan.  Where have you been?  Regan was sentenced to life in prison last March, not death as you seem to imply.  We haven't executed traitors for fifty years.  And Regan's crimes endangered the country, not someone's family.  This irrational obsession you have about adultry is one of the things that will keep you stuck in feudalism for many years to come.  And when is the man, the other adulterer, going to be stoned?  You say that you put to death those who break this "law," but it appears that the enforcement is highly discriminatory.  

You do make a good point about Texas - it executes dozens of people every year, and I think this is excessive.  The crimes that are comitted are always murder, not religious-based sins.  But Texas is considered too extreme by most of the rest of the country.  Most states rarely execute, even for murder.

Finally, it's hard for me to understand your sentences in your last paragraph, but it looks like you're suggesting that we might one day make it legal to kill doctors who perform abortions.  Since you are studying in this country, you should understand that this cannot happen since we are governed by a constitution, and this constitution applies to the entire country (unlike what has been suggested elsewhere in this forum).  What we might one day do is make abortion illegal, which is another matter entirely.  If we do, it will be done with due process and full democratic participation, and it will be unlikely that the death penalty will be imposed.  To suggest that we would be considered quaint colonizers for this doesn't make sense.  We are anything but quaint.

I guess I have a final point.  When the fatwa was issued against Salmon Rushdie, I looked eagerly for the Muslim reaction in this country.  Surely those who came here and understand the importance of free speech would speak out against this outrage, but I heard nothing.  I came to the conclusion that people who think it's reasonable to actually kill someone for something he has written do not belong in civilized society.  I was disheartened, but hold out hope that Muslims can learn the importance of practicing free speech and democracy, no matter what their clerics try to tell them.

Jack Fulcher

I saw this article written by a teacher in your local college.  I went to the college's web site and discovered that there is no way to contact the professor through e-mail.  Not only that, there is no way to contact anyone at the college!  What sort of college is this?  Does the faculty there think that they can only lecture, but they do not have to receive input from the outside world?

This brings me to the point of my note.  He argues that your president is trying to pander to other countries, especially Europe and the United States, when he pushes for the abolition of the death penalty in your country.  I think that, instead, he is embarrassed for his countrymen and women, some of whom have embraced the draconian Shariah laws.  To suggest that someone should be killed for adultry is absurd and makes you all look like fools.  You can believe whatever you wish, but until you purge your culture of such neanderthal attitudes, you will never be taken seriously.  You will be thought of as "those quaint natives who live out in the bush in Kano and stone women to death for adultry."  No one will believe that you are capable of governing yourselves.  There are many people who came here from Nigeria who live in my city (San Francisco), and they all are shocked that their friends back in their homeland might participate in such behavior.  

Please stop this nonsense and join the rest of the world in the 21st century!  Thank you.

Jack Fulcher
California

FDS, it is unnecessary to speak like this.  If you have a point, and I do not know what it might be, you can make it in a civil manner.  Also, put your credentials on the table, do not hide behind initials.  Who are you?  Where do you get this "information," if it is true?  Or are you just a kid who is using daddy's computer while he is away?  Let's keep this forum a clearinghouse for information, not insults.  Jack

Yes, Amina has been set free by the courts, and this is indeed good news.  But this is not a vindication of the Shariah laws, and the very harsh interpretation that put this poor woman in jeopardy in the first place.  She was set free, not because the court saw how barbaric it would be to stone her, but because of some technicalities.  And it was not even unanimous - one judge voted to kill her.

I think that those who let this silly thing get this far are the ones who should hang their heads in shame.  The people who support continued amputations and stonings should look around them and see how such behavior cheapens their society, just like widespread hangings in our old West in America in the 1880s slowed our own development.  Shariah has not been vindicated, at least not these interpretations of the law.  Others in your northern states are awaiting their own executions by stoning, and they may not have the luck to capture the world's attention the same as Amina.

I have been neglecting this fine board for the past couple of weeks, due to the pressures of my work.  I apologize, and will return with responses to the excellent posts in the Death Penalty thread soon.  Say a prayer for Amina and her baby.

Jack

I agree with Dave.  These absurd posts look like they were written by a 10 year old boy.  I couldn't help making one observation, however.  In America, FDS is a product in our drug stores, and it stands for Feminie Deodorant Spray.  It is used by women in a very private way, if you know what I mean.  

Well, this is an interesting word in America.  It all depends on how it is used.  If you call a woman a b**ch directly it is offensive to her, and she might punch you in the eye.  Among the black people here, it is often used as a somewhat rude form of address, like "Hey b**ch, turn that music down."  

Referring to someone as a son-of-a-b**ch, as Mr. Waziri did, is a perfectly acceptable note of derision, and really doesn't say anything about a woman.  Surprisingly, it is not the same as saying that "Your mother's a b**ch!"  Also, we say that something is a "b**ch" if it is difficult or troublesome, like "That exam was a b**ch!"  Women use this term as much as men.

The original meaning, a female dog or some other carniverous animal, is still widely used here, and can be heard at dog shows or seen used on Animal Planet, if you get such a show there.

On the other hand, Dave has made the excellent point that Americans don't really speak English, so I have no idea whether it offends elsewhere.

I wonder if the nice admin folks have fixed the problem we were having using apostrophes and quotation marks.  I guess this post will answer this question.

Jack