Death Penalty In Islam: A Case for Adultery

[Jack_Fulcher]

I am learning a lot here as well, gogannaka.  Thank you for your responses.  My understanding from other posts here was that Shariah law depends much on eye witness testimony as well as the testimony of the victim and accused.  That is, forensic evidence as we use it in America is not employed much.  In a recent post, for instance, Mr. Waziri said, "Yes, DNA test would have been a good thing to use but we here, we say human beings are so important that we only take them by their own words and interrogation is not in our philosophy in any way."  This leads me to believe that human testimony is used to prove whether someone has committed a crime under Shariah.

So let me ask this question of the members of this board, all of whom have at least ten times my own understanding of Islam:  If a woman is raped, how is this proved under Shariah?  If a woman files a complaint with the police, and names her attacker, and he denies the rape, and denies ever having had sex with the woman, will the police test semen taken from the woman against the man's DNA to see if he is lying?  Is Mr. Waziri correct, that the police will not interrogate the man if he denies the charges?  What is the procedure under Shariah if a woman is raped?

I am somewhat surprised to hear Mr. Waziri say that under Islam there is no interrogation, now that I think about it.  Egypt, for example, is notorious for its interrogation techniques of its prisoners, and so is Saudi Arabia.  They have both been accused of using harsh torture methods.  Pakistan is also known for this (I think - I should probably look at the Amnesty International web site before I libel Pakistan).

Mr. Waziri says that the time and resources that went into the prosecution of Amina for her adultery were well spent because it "established justice."  I have no problem if we spend a lot to put violent criminals into jail, but my point is that this is no justice for anyone.  Amina harmed no one, and if she did so did the guy who got her pregnant.  There is no justice in this sort of prosecution.  He mentions the vast amout of time and resources the US put into the Clinton/Lewinsky fiasco, but fails to remember that this was a prosecution for perjury in a federal sexual harassment lawsuit.  It was not a prosecution for adultrery.  I agree that it was a waste of time, but this was the Republicans going after Clinton.  Remember that the vote against him in the US Senate was all Republicans, and the vote for him was all Democrats.  Same in the House of Representatives.  It was a political prosecution, not a prosecution for adultery.  In either case, however, I believe that vast resouces were wasted.

This business about the baby not having committed a crime is still puzzling to me.  I was led to believe that under Shariah adultery is a crime because you are trying to keep some sort of geneological purity, that it's not so much the act itself.  If the objective of the law is this sort of purity, why is the impure baby allowed to live and the mother is killed?  That is, if the objective is for husbands to be ensured that his wives have children with his genetic structure only, so we have this law that attempts to prevent some guy from outside the family from inpregnating one of the wives with his dirty genes, what is the logic of keeping the child with dirty genes and killing the woman who had good genes?  If you can kill some woman in such a cavalier manner, just for having sex, why can't you kill the baby?  Too small a target??

Fulan makes the good point that the baby didn't violate any laws, and this makes sense to me.  But if this is the reason, it seems to me that the underlying reason given, keeping the line pure, is just an excuse.  I suspect that it is something your leaders tell you to make you think that there is some practical value to this law, that it is based on a logical societal reason.  If it were, the baby would be the first to go.

The point I was trying to make about stoning and the technology of executions was that there is no intrinsic value in the method of the execution, that the result is a dead person.  Stoning was used for centuries in areas where stones were plentiful and gas and drugs were not.  Fulan makes an excellent point about the bullets being thought of as miniature stones.  I don't think you realize how barbaric stoning looks to the rest of the world.  Anything you can do to get away from 6th century technologies like this will help your image.  Oh, that's right Mr. Waziri, you do not care what the rest of the world thinks.  That is a shame if it is true.

Bye for now, Jack

[Ummulhuda]

Salaam
There are many things that Jack Fulcher has written that ?I can't help but agree with, and there are certain things that Mallam Waziri has said which I cannot agree with. I dont have the time to go through my thoughts in a coherent manner right now. All I can say is that Islam is a religion which works on logic and reasoning and because of that I tend to agree with Jack's line of argument about the various ways you can verify the truth through forensic science.

The Prophet has said that a preceding generation will always be better than the succeeding generation. If you take the Prophet's Salaam's generation as the starting point and you project into the present, how many generations do you think there have been? Let us say that a new generation comes into existence every twenty years. We are in the year 1424 after the Hijrah of the Prophet. The Prophet Salaam died 10 years after the Hijrah, 1414 years ago. Supposing we take that as the starting point of a new generation, then there have been 70.7 generations after the Prophet Salaam's death. If the moral behaviour of a previous generation is better than a subsequent generation then no one can convince me in this day and age that we must trust in a person's integrity to tell the truth under oath!
Secondly, we as Muslims believe that science and Islam are like sisters. The laws of natural science are in perfect harmony with Islam. All you have to do is read Surahs like Yasin which amongst other things talks about the moon and sun each ?having its own orbital plane and revolving within its plane so that they are always separate entities, or Surah Nur where there is a passage confirming that all life started from water and ?the evolutionary concept of reptiles evoving ?before mammals:
'And Allah has created every animal from water; Of them, there are some that creep on their bellies, some that walk on two legs; and some that walk on four. Allah Creates what He wills; for verily Allah Has Power over all things' (Surah Nur:v 45)
There are references concerning other phenomena in this surah also.

Then in Surah Arrahman we have a verse about ?how fresh and salt water can never mix even where they meet in an estuarine environment, because Allah Has put a barrier between them which they will never transgress.
In the same Surah Arrahman, there is a verse which says

'Oh you assembly of jinns and men, if you can pass beyond the zones of the heavens and earth, then pass! But you can never do so without Authority!' (Surah Arrahman v33).

We know that man has been to the moon and back, he has sent space crafts which have probed ?a bit of the depth of the universe. Man is infact planning to go to Mars. Besides that, from the comfort of an observatory, stars that are millions of light years away have been identified and named. This and many more.
What this means is that Allah gave his Authority and Permission to mankind to probe the mysteries of the universe and the mysteries of natural science. This is in order for muslims to have a better appreciation of Islam and for non muslims to get a conviction of the truth that is inherent in Islam, through logic and reasoning. In fact the whole of the Qur'an for those who have a deep understanding is full of ways to make one reason and think, through exhortations for mankind to look around him at the nature of things, citations of the natural laws of physics and biology, parables and histories of past kingdoms some of whom archaeology has succeeded in unearthing in the twentieth century.

Additionally in Islam, the sole aim of man's life on earth is to be aware of his creator and to worship Him and submit his will to Allah. Everything else is secondary and everything that man does in his daily life is just an ancillary to this worship. As such man has been given control of almost all phenomena on the surface of the earth and is the most superior being second to none in terms of ability and intellect.

We live in an age of scientific reasoning, and if we believe that it is Allah who gave mankind this power of inductive and deductive reasoning, then the results of our facultative thinking are meant to be used to in order to facilitate and enhance our lives and our religion, and that includes using the results of forensic science, genetic engineering, cloning, nuclear fission and fusion ?etc, to achieve worthwhile goals.

[Eskimo]

Salam to all after along along time. I have been curiously following all the arguments and this question attracts my post

?If a woman is raped, how is this proved under Shariah? ?If a woman files a complaint with the police, and names her attacker, and he denies the rape, and denies ever having had sex with the woman, will the police test semen taken from the woman against the man's DNA to see if he is lying? ?Is Mr. Waziri correct, that the police will not interrogate the man if he denies the charges? ?What is the procedure under Shariah if a woman is raped?

In the Quran which I believe leaves no stone unturned in the matter of Sharia (except may be stonning ;D) I found these most interesting to answer the question.
In Surat Nur the verse of testimony on adultery say..Wallazina Yarmuna MUHSINATI...meaning those who accused a pious woman...and cannot produce 4 witnesses...
the word i capitalised means Pious woman (by extension pious man.)

So if a woman accuses a man of raping her, both the character of the woman and the man should be put on the jury's table...(I aint one so let me not go deep).

Still this might not bring justice..ko?..okay the another verse in another surah says..In ja akum FASIKUN bi nabain fa tabayyanu...if a man of questionable character comes with a story then you should probe into the matter...does not that mean you investigate...

SIMPLY IN SUCH A CASE QURAN ASKS US TO INVESTIGATE..In my opinion it can include even sperm test or DNA test...that is sharia not "modernisation".

Egypt is not an Islamic State...although Saudia and Pakistan (to some extent) are. pls dont get them wrong mild introgation can be done in the case of such persons with questionable character.

Later.

[Anonymous]

Hi
I have been away at my political party's Annual Conference (SNP- seeking Independence for Scotland) so I am catching up on the many posts. Mallam Waziri is an expert at starting diversionary arguements. I am overjoyed at decision on Amina.
The stoning of a poor young woman to death would have been a far greater evil than any adultery. I am impressed by the volume of support I found in this forum for mercy and disappointed at some contributions from intelligent people who seem to be stuck in the past. Remember - we European Christians used to drown innocent women and burn heritics at the stake - so we have travelled the same road. It is now acknowledged that up to the year 1900 and even after that illegitimate pregnancies in some parts of my own country Scotland were considered so shameful that they often led to the murder and secret burying of new born children.
The four wise judges who found reasons to excuse Amina have done Nigeria, and Northern Nigeria in particular, a great
service.
Let me ask again a question which was not answered the last time I asked it. Is mutilation and amputation only reserved for the poor man who steals a chicken or a goat while the multi-millionaire thieves of Nigeria go free? Before a nation can step forward justice has to be the same for everybody. Corruption in Nigeria will never stop unless the big thieves are stopped first. Perhaps we can discuss who will make the first move on this.

[nura]

David

Welcome back and how's your meeting? You know I keep asking myself why do the Scotts want to leave Britain? and very unlike Africa they are not taking arms and neither have the UK Govt. imprison hang or maim their leaders, when are we going to be this civil?

Sorry for the digression.

You asked why is it tha only the poor are taken to the Shari'a courts. Well simply because they are poor! In an ideal situation everybody (Muslims) is subject to the Shariah Law because it is Allah's Law but in our own case there are a lot of mitigating factors that make our society a non-ideal situation. Let's take corruption first, the poor man cannot buy his way out. Neither can he buy witnesses or evidence but the rich can thus there is no way the case will reach the courts.

Second, probably it was the poverty that makes him commit the offence. No farm, no job, no food for instance and like they say in this country "Man must Chop!"

Third, due to the popularity of the Shari'ah the whole thing may set up or overblown to score political pointfor reelection or cheap popularity.

I believe the Shari'ah Law is based on faith especially where witnesses are required. A very harsh punishment awaits he who gives false evidence and liars on the Day of Judgement and therefore people that believe there will be Day of Judgement will not give false evidence or swear on false pretenses. But the problem is how many do believe as such these days.

Take for example the case of Zina, unless there are four witnesses who are adjudged to be very truthful and faithful and that have seen the "pestle" in the "mortar" only a confession will convict a suspect. This is mainly because only the faithful will admit to committing an offence that will cause his death and gruesomely too. Even at the time of the Prophet only people that admitted to committing the crime were stonned or punished.

But considering that it is difficult to get witnesses and people are not faithful enough I think we have to use Science to prove innocence or cupability of suspects. Take for instance the guy they acquitted in respect of Amina Lawal, a simple DNA test could have proved whether he is guilty or not. And there is room for independent judgeement eventhough DNA test is not in Hadith or Qur'an. Since it is for the good of the religion and all so it is to ensure fairness.

So Mr. David it is sad for the poor that Nigeria today including the Shari'a states is not his world and not just in the Shari'a courts eveen in the magistrate and all other courts here hardly justice is done. But make no mistake about it the Shari'a is not a law for the poor alone. If in Nigeria or in todays world it seems to be well it was not meant to be and it should not be. It is the only law that will librate the poor, weak and impoverished of the ideal society. But this is only when it is implemented properly and justice and fairness is supreme in the society.

[nura]

David

Welcome back and how's your meeting? You know I keep asking myself why do the Scotts want to leave Britain? and very unlike Africa they are not taking arms and neither have the UK Govt. imprison hang or maim their leaders, when are we going to be this civil?

Sorry for the digression.

You asked why is it tha only the poor are taken to the Shari'a courts. Well simply because they are poor! In an ideal situation everybody (Muslims) is subject to the Shariah Law because it is Allah's Law but in our own case there are a lot of mitigating factors that make our society a non-ideal situation. Let's take corruption first, the poor man cannot buy his way out. Neither can he buy witnesses or evidence but the rich can thus there is no way the case will reach the courts.

Second, probably it was the poverty that makes him commit the offence. No farm, no job, no food for instance and like they say in this country "Man must Chop!"

Third, due to the popularity of the Shari'ah the whole thing may set up or overblown to score political pointfor reelection or cheap popularity.

I believe the Shari'ah Law is based on faith especially where witnesses are required. A very harsh punishment awaits he who gives false evidence and liars on the Day of Judgement and therefore people that believe there will be Day of Judgement will not give false evidence or swear on false pretenses. But the problem is how many do believe as such these days.

Take for example the case of Zina, unless there are four witnesses who are adjudged to be very truthful and faithful and that have seen the "pestle" in the "mortar" only a confession will convict a suspect. This is mainly because only the faithful will admit to committing an offence that will cause his death and gruesomely too. Even at the time of the Prophet only people that admitted to committing the crime were stonned or punished.

But considering that it is difficult to get witnesses and people are not faithful enough I think we have to use Science to prove innocence or cupability of suspects. Take for instance the guy they acquitted in respect of Amina Lawal, a simple DNA test could have proved whether he is guilty or not. And there is room for independent judgeement eventhough DNA test is not in Hadith or Qur'an. Since it is for the good of the religion and all so it is to ensure fairness.

So Mr. David it is sad for the poor that Nigeria today including the Shari'a states is not his world and not just in the Shari'a courts eveen in the magistrate and all other courts here hardly justice is done. But make no mistake about it the Shari'a is not a law for the poor alone. If in Nigeria or in todays world it seems to be well it was not meant to be and it should not be. It is the only law that will librate the poor, weak and impoverished of the ideal society. But this is only when it is implemented properly and justice and fairness is supreme in the society.

[Waziri]

Interesting responses we have here , I think I should have no excuses of being busy since I have chosen to be a member of this forum.

Let me start with the comments by Mr. Fulcher.

Yes actually you constantly give me reasons to believe you are here with some less than honest intentions.

Because if you insist that what we spent on Amina's case in our pursuit to establish justice is a waste of time, talent and resources then I say you should have earlier seen that in your own system first . Afterall there is no quest to justice that does not require a " waste" of time. It is the natural thing in litigation worldwide.

And if truly you are conversant with that truth then why condemn me in my "waste" of time in quest of establishing justice in my own worldview and value system?

Unless if you are attempting a ridicule.

You also tried in many of your posts here to inform or warn us that  religious ppl or leaders are  always using such laws in order to maintain grip on  ppl.

And suprisingly when I tried to expose your ridicule of our system of values and establishing justice, you said I was warning them of the existence of some outskasts who take away their precious beliefs and that all religious ppl do this.

So Mr Fulcher when you warn ppl of the existence of ppl who use laws to keep them down, you are doing the right thing. When Waziri informs them of the existence of ppl who rob them of there faith, he is doing the wrong thing. Is that true Mr. Fulcher?

You also ask me to tell you the truth of whether I live on religion or not? What good will that do to you? Are you ready to believe me, since you have no other means of verifying my claims? But yet if could tell me why you are asking this question, I will go ahead and answer it.

Yes Mr Fulcher you are really insisting that we must be the same if you say we all must look at adultery from the same cone-angle. I say to me it is as criminal as murder, you say no it is not a crime.

This you do knowing fully(may be) that even on fundamental issues ppl disagree and that even in your "new" economist religion. The graphs, the mathematics and logic in socialist economy is different from that in capitalist economy and they all boast of being scientific. Also the graphs you find in these economies are quite different from the ones you find in Islamic economic system.

Does that sounds new?

It is true that Islamic economic system is in existence. It is now studied in Malaysia. You do  a bachelor, Masters and Phd in it. In Islam you have the banking system, alms system among other things.

Mr Fulcher, it appears like there are a lot of differences between me and you and it is the  reason why I try to be explicit , precise and meticulous in my articulation.

It seems like your  defination of religion, limits to belief and worship, as you see it in your immediate constituency. Right? And This maybe is the reason why you say economistism is your faith.

But we, in the Islamicity, religion is not only belief and worship but a "total way of life", an ideology. We only use religion in the absence of a better word to describe Islam.

You can see how your religion of economics can only be a part in our religion. Our religion concerns not only with the economy, but the social, legal and political.

Your religion comes under a major ideology called liberal democracy while mine is the major ideology itself, called Islam.

Another thing is, your  concept of gene pool and genealogy in relation to its purity I can say here, is greatly influenced by the understanding of eugenics societies in the West or particularly that of German Hitler. And it is the reason why I insisted on the point.

When I say protection of genealogy and sexual purity which in other words is family tree and sexual purity that  does not concur in anyway with that concept as understood by Hitler or your eugenic societies.

Okay check my post you will not see "The purity of lineage or genealogy" but you will see something like this :

'You see, Islam seeks to provide a society which understands Sexual Intercourse in general to be something very noble and sacred that should not be carried out but in a legitimate manner. Let it be that progeny or lineage is so important. That sexual purity among other things means nobility. "

in eugenics as it is understood by Hitler and other eugenics societies, biolologically, gene has influence on ones character and disposition as a result it has to be kept pure. If a person is physically abnormal or mentally, the chances are that person will breed persons of the same character and disposition. As a result of this thinking and in the hope of keeping genealogy pure,  they kill all abnormal children and prohibit their women from marrying foreingners all in the hope of keeping the gene pool pure, which, as they believe, is a pre-requisite for the continuation of the culture of having all sane, beautiful and non-defective populace in a society.  

You see the cone-angle from which you are viewing it? And this is why you insist that we too since we want keep genealogy pure we have to kill the issue of illegitimate sexual intercourse.

While I on my part say and repeat here that we "award" such punishments only because the person who commits the adultery is a nuisance and his crime calls for stonning no matter how cruel it may appear so that others will continue to see that adultery is a heinous crime that deserve most barbaric treatment when commited. Period( Please let everybody re-read the post in which I made that explanation) .

We also surely want to protect the family tree not in BIOLOGICAL TERMS AS EUGENICS REQUIRES, BUT IN SOCIETAL TERMS AS MORALITY REQUIRES. This also is the reason why we are not killing the issues borne out of illicilit sexual behaviour as the the members of your eugenics societies would suggest.  Because the children did not commit any immorality.


And I think I said also:

"This is the truth of life, of human nature. Illicit sexual affairs are not good things. They do not rhyme with human conscience at all. In fact they are a sure way to another series of unfaithful dispositions like telling lies and betrayal of trust. As I once explained, is spite of the moral degeneration the Western World is today undergoing they don't elect as leaders, particularly political leaders who are known to be of soiled sexual purity. This is the implication on material terms of rulings concerning adultery and fornications in Islam. Their roles are largely in building up a fair and just social structure. "

on the issue of feeding on religion I know you see religious clerics there in your constituency making money with their Churches. Is that not true? As you said your religion is nothing more than economitism which respects nothing more than demand and supply, so, you would think, clerics only use Churches to maintain control over their own daily demands and heighten there purchasing power.

As a result you started thinking that Waziri also can be such a person but this time under Islam not Christianity, afterall all religions are the same, you would think.

On this I will allow other Muslims in the forum to speak, for I seem to be speaking too much.

[Waziri]

On the issue of a woman who reports a rape case to the police, here I go:

As Eskimo explained, if anybody should claim being raped by any man, she should bring four eyewitness to that . But yet I do not agree with him and Huda that in the absence of four eye witnesses, scientific methods should be used. I state my reasons.

First of all Waziri also is into science and technology. Mine is even more concrete science, since it deals with mathematics and other physical quantities more than than Mr. Fulcher’s. Because while  an economist deals with statistics, forecasts and predictions that may not necessarily  turn out to be correct, mine is a computer programming and information technology which is more practical and real.

As a mathematician, in theory, I know that 1 + 1 cannot be more than 2 in any way, but yet it is confirmed that in practice as in engineering and all other applied mathematics, measurements as in length, 1 + 1 cannot be 2.

Those who do engineering will tell you that   in numerical analysis or numerical techniques it is confirmed that in practice there is always errors. As a result 1 + 1  can only be  1.99999 or 2.11111 or more or less. This is to show that there is inherent defect in man to achieve perfection. Results in practical sciences must not  and are not always as true as they are in books. In short sciences cannot be, and I repeat are not  100% efficacious.

Yes the methods can be true but the practicality is always marred by defects.

This is to say in bolder terms in cases of adultery: WHAT AN EYE WITNESS CANNOT SEE, MIGHT ALSO BE MISSED BY SCIENTIFIC METHODS.

IF SCIENCE CAN BE TRUSTED, HOW ABOUT THE PPL WHO CONDUCT THE SCIENTIFIC EXPERIMENTS?

Are they not of similar mass and momentum coupled with intellectual density as those of the scientists. Pls what is more scientific than seing things in reality?

This also add to the fact that using this modern technology results of scientific findings can easily be contrived  or altered.

A mafia can easily reach my doctor, under blackmail , terror or monetary inducements, the doctor may be forced to get the necessary stuff from me.

A lady could be planted somewhere who can easily claim that I raped her. Then all scientific evidence will prove that I did it and I would be convicted.

If you like,  get a team of specialists, at every level of their profession, they could easily be made to conduct the experiments and give results contrary to the truth of the matter. It would then appear to be something else. These scientific results can always be controlled.

Who can remember the results of the autopsy carried out on late Abiola's corpse?

Where they not tailored to rhyme with the substance of the day?

Have we not heard that the socalled specialists who justified the attack on Iraq used falsified scientific evidences to prove that Iraqi had WMD?

Please, my dear good ppl, do not tell me that it  is not possible. I am a Muslim who believe in science but I also believe that it is not the scientific methods that matter in Islamic legal theories but the integrity of those ppl who carry out the experiments.

Are they the type that can do it with maximum sincerity or not? Remember, that skills in scientific experiments is not synonymous to character and disposition. As a result we say let ppl of known integrity should testify to the truth of the happening. Those who see everything as it is happening. That we may be able to protect the accused of possible and unwanted incrimination or contrivance.

And finally, Islam in its laws also prescribed that whenever a woman is going out, there is a NEED that she should be accompanied by a male companion. This in order to avoid those unwanted stories of rape, because you hardly here a case of rape that say "and my cousin is there watching". Rapes are always    recorded when a man and a woman are alone  in isolation. But if she was together with another, she surely cannot be raped. But  if she was, unfortunately, while together with some man apart from the rapist then there would be many a sings that will show the veracity of her claim. May be the corpse of her protector.

Yes, Mr. Fulcher, there is no interrogation in Islam. When I come up again I will take to that issue + the submission of Ummulhuda in regard to that Hadith. But the truth of the matter is a society which takes ppl by their words is a society that can easily be evolved. Remember, that democracy, before, was an ideal which when uttered at a particular period in history ppl dismissed as something unrealistic. I will take to all these when I come back.

For Ummuhuda, that Hadith did not pass the creteria in our dear Textual Critism. I am sorry that I keep disagreeing with you. I know you live your nane: Ummylhuda, Mother of guidance.

I typed a lot this afternoon , though I have no excuse than to do that, as the Americans would say: " Waziri, You've got it coming".

[Anonymous]

Hi
Nice post from Abumujahid. The tone of this discussion is improved with serious and thoughtful contributions coming from most contributors.
Let me put a point for discussion - "A hungry man stealing to feed his wife and children commits no sin."

And still I wonder which great national leader will rise in Nigeria to put an end to corruption which is destroying Nigeria's future. And will the Moslems vote for such a man if he is a Christian and will the Christians vote for such a man if he is a Moslem?

[Eskimo]

Salam,
I disagree with you too, Waziri.

May be one of us is about to learn something again.
Islam prescribed that a woman should always be accompanied by a man whan goin out...ummulhuda or ummita or any of those ladies do you mind being followed by a man perhaps your brother anytime you are going out?

Even with a man will that stop the crime of raping. what of if there is rape despite that...are you saying that will be the fault of the lady? perhaps she should be flogged.

Sometimes I wonder why we accept modernity in some things and reject others. We used loudspeakers in our mosques...a product of science and technology...and reject some that will make life even easier...

Okay in mathematics 1+1 may be 1.999> (which I dont agree with..1+1=2 anywhere). that is not perfect of course but know that we are not created to be perfect nor does God want us to be.

Within the limit of that error, I believe DNA test will give atleast 99.999>% evidence against an alleged criminal if no human witness is found.

I belive that is why God mentioned MUHSINATI a pious woman (or man ). Know that it is not any person that you will accuse and recieve flogging if you cant prove it!

I am very sorry if I sound somehow.
Peace and blessing of ALLah upon us all.

[Anonymous]

i see sense in not using these DNA tests. Because if our fear is lack of integrity on the part of four eye witnesses how about the integrity of those scienists who carry out the DNA test?

And if we say we will continue using DNA test adultery can be a convinient tool for politicians to eliminate their opponents.

Ah! do we think all the criminal assaults  that are being perpetrated by celebrities and politicians in America are true?

By God there is alot of politics in these things. There are alot of contrivances in them. Waziri is perrfectly right.

We cannot just give room for people to operate under the garb of sacalled scientific methods to be tempering with the integrity of good others.

This is where i see the sense in Waziri's claim. In Nigeria and everywhere across the globe many a times crimes were stage-managed in order to eliminate opponets and this if employed can be another beautiful means for those in power.

Had we right from the onset tried doing it that way. I am sure the politicians even Obasanjo would not have opposed it.

Waziri, it is great we have you aroung here.

We should not sacrifice conscience for our science.

Why should a woman dress the way she is dressing now?

I think they are the ones raping men these days not the other way round.

If Islam prescribes that women should be accompanied by men on there outings the reasons are clearly palpable.
It is not the issue of Ummita liking it or not.
For it is not everything one likes is good for him.

Waziri once adviced you to look for what Allah wants and his apostle in the Qur'an not what you like. Unless if you are not ready to practice the Islam the way Allah wants.

Eskimo I think you said you heed to his advice?

[al_hamza]

oh i just dropped by to say,
i have read it that a woman may go out alone, but a sepcific distance, i dont know how far from home, but she can go out alone.

[Eskimo]

okay..
No DNA test we all say NO TO SCIENCE...that inconsistent science...and the western scientist..Ko? as if you are saying there are no muslim scientist or anything invented by the west is not true even if muslim scientist found out the same thing..why then keep talking about the integrity of the scientist?
Anyway we are in the process of learning..HOW CAN A RAPED WOMAN REST HER CASE UNDER SHARIA? simple. pls give us a solution.
A woman wearing prohitive type of dressing...
moving around without a male companion...
and she got herself raped...
THAT IS HER FAULT I guess...
No case for her simple.

I wonder wher you guys get that stuff of a woman not going out alone.

The thing is a woman cannot TRAVEL without her Muharram
but if she is not travelling she can move out alone if she so wished.
Reasons Hadith No 160, 161 and 164 of Sahihul Bukhari Vol 7

160: A man cannot be in seclusion with a starnge woman without her muharram around.

161: A man and a woman can talked aside privately if the are not in seclusion ie with people moving around

164: Allah has allowed women to go out for their need

In the last hadith Sauda bint Baaz went out in the night ALONE!

We need solution to our rape case if there is one please.

And next time please make your face familiar ;D ;D

Maasalam

[Bashir]

waziri, if "my cousin was there watching" while i was being raped,how will that support my case? he is only one person n d law requires 4. as for a woman being accompanied everywhere, how realistic is that?

[Waziri]

My dear forumnites,

It is true that everybody has the right to think, sound or react any how to anything we say here. I can remember how Allah says in regard to mankind: Inna hadainahussabila imma shakirah wa imma kafurah, " We have shown him (mankind) the way , if he likes he thanks or rebels further".

For Eskimo let him get his thought straight, let him not be a frayed nerve, using a loud speaker, as a means of calling prayer  is not synonymous to using DNA test to establish social justice where error no matter how simple it is is significant. And  for your information , even in sciences, one can be 99% right only to be wrong in the remaining 1% which is the most CRITICAL point at which life revolves.

This is even in physics ,mathematics and chemistry which appears to be more concret and real than speculative sciences as those in biology.


This forwaded by the distinguished scholar , Solly Zuckerman, in the book : Beyond The Ivory  Tower, Newyork: Toplinger Publications, p.19, here him speaking:

"We then move right off the register of objective truth into those fields of presumed biological science, like extrasensory perception or the interpretations of man’s fossil history, where to the FAITHFUL anything is possible – and where the ardent believer is sometimes able to believe several contradictory things at the same time"

PPl get over awed whenever science is mentioned, the truth is knowledge is a secret and one gets it only by its method. And sience and technology so far has only helped man to master his environment and better his living not to establishing justice, predicting human behaviour or improving man’s spirit.

Mark my words and start your research today. Any state across the globe which uses pure science is administering social justice is betraying or deceiving its populace. Because it will wake up oneday to hear that the Dalton’s atomic theories are no longer true. That another theory like that of evolution has collapsed. Live your word.

If we do not know we know today that science has been and forever will continue to be used as a political tool in as much as bad ppl remain at the helm of the affairs of mankind.

If we don't know we know today that women have been used and are still being  used today as a strong tool from which POWER was wielded,  is wielded and will forever be wielded on the populace. If you are good with women you are truly good with the crowd.

These laws that do not care about how women dress, how they present themselves to men but only care WHEN they succeed in raping the targeted- man, with proofs from "extrasensory perception" as used  in the USA should carefully be watched.

Okay, what is the punishment for a culprit in a case of rape in the USA?  Or the victim is not only paid back in material, monetary terms?

As a result many a professional harlots use it as an advanced way of getting  fat money. Or is rape cases in the USA is on the decline today?

Islam did not live any stone unturned. It prescribed preventive and if you like curative measures against rape and finally says in the Qur'an: HE WHO FEARS ALLAH, ALLAH WILL GIVE HIM A WAY OUT

This is to say follow the prescription and certainly Allah will provide for the solutions.

We are ready to learn from anybody with opinions presented from imformed perspective – Islamic Theology, It's Legal, Political and Social Theorems merged with studies from other honest and unbiased SCHOLARS from anywhere across the globe-not opinions that emanate from the Hollywood Scripts.

"Mudai ilimi muka tambaya ko a London ko a Arabiya" Sa’adu Zungur

Bashir re-read us there what we say is " rape cases are hardly recorded in the presence of another man who is in complete opposition to the action and if that should happen then there would be too many a sign to prove the veracity of her claim"

I have gotta go. I have students to take on Computer Packages. If Eskimo wants more comprehensive answer he can conviently post that question to islam-online.com where more competent scholars across the globe will attend to it. He can then later imform us further on his findings.

Will come back later with my thesis on interrogation.