Death penalty: Obsolete?

[Anonymous]

Mr Jack Fulcher. Your approached this topic with all the arrogance inherent in the subconscious American psyche of we are the 'best of the best' which of course you are not. It is not any wonder that al Hamza was offensive; your attitude incites offence. I'm glad to see that you've changed your approach somewhat and are more friendly in tone and less haughty.  
I am a Muslim, I am a woman and I am against abolishing capital punishment. At the same time, I am against the stoning of Amina Lawal. As an Islamic Injuction I cannot say with certainty that I am against stoning in general. This is simply because I am not knowledgeable in shariah law, therefore I have to abide by what the more learned amongst our Ulamas say. But more specifically my acceptance of the punishment for stoning has to do with the hadiths on the subject matter, whereby the Prophet Salaam was known to have passed a sentence on one or two occasions.

Two to three months ago, I read an article titled 'The Evolving Nature of the Qur'an and its Implications for Interpreting Ahadith' on the Gamji website posted by Dr. Saleem Ahmed. It contained excerpts from his book 'Beyond Veil and Holy War'. He wrote the article in connection with the Amina Lawal case. He argued convincingly about the probability that the divine command on stoning (rajam) could have been abrogated by the revelation of the first two verses of Surah Nur:
'The man and woman guilty of adultery or fornication: flog each of them with a hundred stripes. Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a party of believers witness their punishment' (Qur'an, Surah Nur verse 2)
'Let no man guilty of adultery or fornication marry any but a woman similarly guilty or an unbeliever; nor let any but such a man or an unbeliever marry such a woman. To the believers such a thing is forbidden' (Qur'an, Surah Nur verse 3).
Dr. Ahmed then gave Ahadith examples of times when the Prophet passed sentences of lashings and sentences of rajam. The severity of the sentence depended on the marital status of the accused person. On most occasions the stoning sentence was passed on a married person while lashing was administered to an unmarried person.
He then compared the date of the revelation of surah Nur with the dates of some of the hadiths. According to the Qur'anic commentary of Sheikh Abdallah Yusuf Ali, the second and third verse of Surah Nur were probably revealed around the 8th year after the Hijra (630 C.E.) The Prophet Salaam died two years later in 10 AH (632 C.E.) Thus according to Dr.Ahmed, many of the incidents concerning the punishment for illicit sexual intercourse would have occured in the years (17 - 18 years of prophethood) preceding Surah Nur rather than in the four to the last two years of the Prophet Salaam's life (other verses of Surah Nur were first revealed circa 628 C.E. and the second and third verses were revealed two years later). Therefore the prescriptions for rajam do seem to predate at least the 2nd and the 3rd verses of Surah Nur, and these verses could abrogate the earlier injunction of stoning with the milder one for whipping. It makes perfect sense to me.  
Suffice it to say that there are other credible and legitimate points put forward by Dr. Ahmed to bring his message across that there is a need for Islamic Scholars to quote:
'discuss the issue (of stoning to death for committing adultery) dispassionately in the light of the Qur'an's evolutionary nature'  unquote.
After reading the article, i have become somewhat ambivalent about stoning. But more than that, I was against the sentence passed on both Amina and Safiya even before I came across Dr. Ahmed's article. The reason for this is that it is very difficult to convict a person of adultery. Mr. Fulcher got it wrong when he said that a woman has to bring four witnesses to testify on her behalf that she did not commit adultery. The fact of the matter is that the burden of proof lies with the ACCUSER not the ACCUSED. It is the accuser who has to furnish four witnesses who have to testify that they saw the GRAPHIC act of intercourse like - what is that term commonly used - a piston in a cylinder. The witnesses have to have about them one single and very difficult characteristic: they must be certified by the generality of the populace never to have lied in their entire lives. Failing this, their testimony in court is null and void and cannot  be accepted. If the accuser fails to secure four such people to testify on his behalf then he is punished with 80 lashes for defamation of character.
In the case where it is between a husband and wife one accusing the other of adultery, a swearing of oath takes place whereby the accuser swears five times on the Holy Qur'an that the accused commited adultery and the accused also swears five times that he/she did not commit adultery. In this case no judgment is passed on either party save to dissolve the marriage. In a situation where a child is concerned or a pregnancy, it becomes the sole responsibility of the mother since it has been publicly disowned by the husband.
Both Amina and Safiya are divorcees I believe (unfortunately I have not been following their eventful lives). I am also embarrassed to admit that I have no idea under which circumstance each came to be accused of adultery, but I understand that one of them was through a budding pregnancy with no husband to back it up. This makes a somewhat difficult situation to analyse and like I said earlier I know next to nothing about Shariah law. However, I did read an article by Sanusi Lamido Sanusi who wrote about the differing stands of jurists on the matter in the different Mazhabs and I read it here on Kano Online. The article was copied by the administrator and posted on this website but I have no idea where it is, at the present moment. (Admin, fish it out for another preview pls). In some of the rulings a pregnant divorced woman is given the benefit of the doubt even if the pregnancy occurs four years into her divorced state. This occurs simply in order to safeguard a life - the life of the accused woman. The woman's denial of adultery is also accepted inspite of the evidence of pregnancy.
Anybody interested in the matter or anything on islamic jurisprudence I should recommend he gets in touch with Sanusi L. Sanusi via the Gamji website. One can easily get his email from there.
I am firmly in favour of capital punishment as prescribed by Islam. If a person wilfully kills another person, his punishment should be that he forfeits his life also. It is not 'vengeful' or 'wasteful' to execute a killer. It safeguards society from the possibility of his killing again, which is what happens times without number when prisoners are released on parole in the West. And who says it does not assuage the grief of the berieved? Well believe me it does. The very act of convicting a killer and incarcerating him acts as a cartharsis on some victims. How much more if one knows that the criminal has got his 'comeuppance?'
Islamic criminal or penal code may be deemed to be harsh by many non muslims. But at the heart of it, punishment in islam is there as a deterrent; that is why it is advocated that it should be carried out in public. The sight of a public chastisement not only humbles the chastised, it impacts upon the public in such a way that no one wants to be so humiliated and so s/he hopefully avoids committing a crime.

[gogannaka]

Hmn,this topic i can see is becoming ever more interesting......
I'm not used to making lengthy comments.i thought i should,anyway,put up some points here:
The first one goes to al hamzah;in arguments or debates,never loose your temper.The first sign of defeat in debates is when one party starts throwing abuses or calling names.....so please al hamzah coolo temper...and be an honourable gentleman(i know you are).

Secondly;it seems the issue of abolishing the death penalty(in Nigeria) is no longer the topic for discussion .Sharia has taken over.

Anyway,i dont think the nigeria prison service could even handle the number of additional inmates it would recieve if the death penalty is abolished....right now the nigerian prisons are in a deplorable state..it will cost the government a lot.......
But even if the nigerian prisons are in a better condition i dont think the death penalty should be abolished.Why ?because it wouldnt be fair judgement if someone  takes the life of a fellow human being only to be punished with a life sentence(maximum).And i bet you, in nigeria, those given the life sentence will surely someday find their way out.

The issue of abolishing the death sentence should be left for the states to decide.Any state that wants to abolish the death penalty should do so.

I'll comment on the sharia issue later(maybe)
I guess i'm better at the chit chat section...peace

[Anonymous]

Hi all
This topic is being seriously debated now and I am very glad about that. I note my last post seems to have got lost or deleted. No problem. The debate widens and I welcome the ladies to it. Neither myself nor Jack Fulcher are attacking Islam or sharia. What we are questioning is the interpretation put on some of it by some people. Laws, religious and moral as well as civil, are only as just and correct as those who interpret them are wise and human beings are not infallible.

I seem also to have lost my membership status - probably because I keep forgetting to log in. This is what happens when you get old!

[Jack_Fulcher]

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.8)   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

[Jack_Fulcher]

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

[lionger]

Al hamza, I said to write respectively instead of insulting others. I said to answer questions directly instead of sarcastic quips. Infact i begged u, still u no gree. haba u know u can't prove a word of your response to me. Anyways I digress. What I want to say (and infact, did say) is that we have all drastically narrowed the discussion, or is Sharia is the only reason for which the death penalty exists in Nigeria? I understand its significance to the Muslim, but so far I've heard of only one death sentence passed thru the Sharia, and I think the crime was murder. And the Nigerian govt will not allow any death sentence for adultery to be carried out (fortunately or not). Finally, like I said b4 and I believe someone else also mentioned, that the decision (if at all important, and frankly it is not) should be made by the states.

[Waziri]

We are making progress I can see.

Jack Fulcher,

I really can become invalid when I see myself being misrepresented or misquoted or even quoted out of context, cos I am not in a better position to decipher the mind of the writer to see whether his intentions are pure or drossy. All I can see is my personal reputation being put to stake.  And as such I will just try to leave, seeing no just cause to which I should join issue with the person.  But now that we are coming to terms I think we can conveniently have a chat. It sure a great thing that we are discussing.

When you say we desire isolation, I say it is not so, to some degree I can even go ahead and put the claim that we have a broader worldview than the Americans. Because the amount of information we have today about Europe, America and other countries in the world is no closer to the amount of information you ppl have about us.  I am writing this from Nigeria, Kaduna(my state) in a Local Government called Zaria. I am a native of Zaria but yet every day I wake up I listen to news on current events from CNN, Sky News and BCC WORLD. VOA and BBC Hausa and English service (Hausa is my native language and BBC and Voa have programmes in the language).

Add to this also are numerous local American Channels, Music and Movies, which feed me on how life is in USA, and now that there are stuffs like Internet and other communications gadgets. You see Mr Jack we are not in isolation. I think from the way u speak, u don't have enough information about us the way we have about u.

True to God, nobody will start stoning you here when you commit adultery. Everybody understands that it is only to the Muslims that the law is being applied since the issue is that of faith. Nobody also is stoning women and allowing men to go scot-free. The laws of our religions in regard to adultery doesn't discriminate on gender but at the level of practice women are seemed to be more vulnerable to it because of the basic physiological differences that exist between men and women. If you really read my article you would see that the argument was the woman confessed to it and the man denied it. And in the philosophy of Islam, we say 'take ppl on their words when they speak until they prove to you they are not trustworthy' not like in the West where in court of laws the philosophy is  'Do not believe ppl until they prove to you that they are trust worthy'. We also share one thing in philosophy with the West when it comes to court we say 'ignorance is not an excuse'.

The case of Amina is one of an interesting episode in the history of court in Nigeria.  She is poor and at the same time ignorant of the Law. Some man impregnated her and she being a divorced, her punishment supposes to be that of an adulterer, had it been she was never married before it will be some 100 lashes only. She demanded that he should fend for her newborn baby. The man refused. Some clerics tried to settled them because in the matters of Capital Punishment in Islam the interest is always to see the way we can save the life not the way we can take it. But the woman denied them listening ear thinking that they wanted to cheat her. She took  to police and reported everything. The police referred her to court of law where she went and confessed again. The man was called; he denied it, the judge tried to save her by suggesting that may be she was forced into it as suggested in the code of the laws since our desire is to save the life and protect the genealogy, but she affirmed saying that it happened.

The judge passed the right verdict. Here, I will stop to mention that one of the objectives of Law in Islam is the protection of genealogy and here the genealogy is being violated. This genealogy is very important to us because we believe that every individual that can cheat on f his own spouse and commit adultery is a nuisance to the society. He is not trustworthy, he is a representation of mischief as u see the definition of mischief u drew my attention to__He is not fit to live.  

 Well Jack why did the Americans tried impeaching Clinton when they learnt about his affairs with Lewinsky? I guess the argument is if he cannot be faithful to his wife he certainly cannot be faithful to his country and if he cannot be faithful to his country he better be going. We say then in other words, he is not responsible to his family and of course not responsible to his country. In our philosophy these kind of ppl are a danger to society, they spread mischief, and they are not fit to live. They cannot live of to their obligations and duties like Clinton and therefore must go. This is it.

Back to the issue of Amina, Immediately after the verdict of the court came, diverse opinions from those who know the essence of the law, those who are not fully acquainted with the philosophy of the law and the Media houses of the West started spreading propaganda that we are stoning women around here. Now you believe them, and I tell you even a 200-year-old person if there is such person alive down here cannot tell you a case of stoning he/she witnessed.

Yes, there are some among us who put up the argument that since we are restoring back these aspects of the law into the code after some 60 years of their abrogation from the code by the British Colonial Masters then we should postpone the aspects dealing with Amputation, Adultery, Alcohol, etc. these we keep out until when the economy improves a little to the extent where by when anybody steels everybody will wonder why that person steels in the face of abundance. It is then and only then we would have justification to Amputate his hand believing him to be a psycho, an invalid a nuisance who is spreading mischief and therefore is not fit to move around with his two hands. This group actually makes sense because this is the practice during the time of the Prophet of Islam and to some degree I belong to them.

But there is the other group also which suggests that we can go ahead and continue   implementing them since our ppl are not yet poorer than the ppl of the Prophet’s time. They argue that it is in human beings; they cannot in anyway be fully satisfied. They argue that that ideal is never and has never been achieved in history.

You see the issue is for the Muslims to resolve not for the West to come with its "Almighty" media house and portray us as barbaric ppl who discriminate against women by killing them when they commit adultery. They speak about women saying that they have the best way of making them to feel respected and yet it is only in the Muslim countries you have women leading as first citizens. You have Indonesia and in the recent past Pakistan. Where is the gender sensitivity they are so much ranting about in the Muslim countries?

Oh! This post is getting to long and there are many issues you raised which I want to address but anyway let me continue.
Iran   practices the law. And I told you earlier that we don't kill until when it is necessary. As a result we don't to it happily and that is why we see no reason to get it on tape and publicise it to the seeing and the hearing of everybody that we kill human beings. I doubt much if the USA government does that. They only announce that they have done it but the details and the screams of the victim are never let out.

Mr. Jack, It is not that we don't like science. NO.  And it is not the liberal democracy as being practiced in the West that produces scientific and technological advancements. No. Science and Technology is a skill, it flourishes everywhere. If you check your reference in history you will see that there were times when Muslims led the world of science. You will see that there were times when Chinese led the world of science… Jack, the proof is overwhelming and liberal democracy should not be taking credit for what it does not produce. When we say we don't want Western Ideologies we are not saying we don't want Science and Technology. And when we say they should leave us alone with our ideologies we say that because they don't take time to study them they only use their indices to gauge us.

Yes, we blame the West for some of our problems because the West has never seen reason to solve our real problems. It only comes into our affairs when it has something at stake. Many a times it sponsors dictators who never care for us to be our leaders just for the simple reason that they do its (West) bid. The reasons are many that I cannot relate all here. But let me quote from the Nobel Prize Winner:

"Save the enslaved in the African south! Save the famished in Africa! Save the Palestinians from the bullets and the torture! Nay, save the Israelis from profaning their great spiritual heritage! Save the ones in debt from the rigid laws of economy! Draw their attention to the fact that their responsibility to Mankind should precede their commitment to the laws of a science that Time has perhaps overtaken."

So Mr Jack this is our worldview. I wish I can be more explicit. But time is against me. and I am typing on the system. For Eskimo pls I will respond to your arguments when next I come up you can see this post is too long. For the mischief thing, I did not mean it in its technical term in Shari'a but was only using INglish certaily not EXglish(Laughter)

[Eskimo]

The a_H I kno is a nyc person...I am sure he was just a lil unhappy...thinking that Jack and Dave were attacking muslims way of life...but now I am sure he realised his mistakes...u can see that in his recent posts.

Ms Guest, welcome on board from me in particular...atleast in you I see somebody who shares my beliefs...what you read from that man...is what I have been wagging my tail about...feel relaxed in your faith..we have backing from the Holy Quran...that stoning was...but no more!

What remains?...trying to make people understand our view...in the light of our religion...be steadfast for with time...justice (the true sharia) will be uphold.

I found an interview in Daily Trust of Wed 3rd Sept 03 of one Ali Asghar from Indian Inst...He was also yakking about the same issue...what I like most is his saying..."The words of Quran are DIVINE, but the interpretation is HUMAN"

Islam is simple and easy to practice...a liberation force...but We muslim are not LIBERALS...we are RIGID...so UNLIKE OUR RELIGION...SO UNLIKE OUR HOLY PROPHET (SAW)...who had never attacked Meccan innocent citezens (with a hijack plane ;D) in order to subdue Abusufyan (the then leader of Mecca) and Idolatory (Meccan interest).

Uncle Dave, try and have some rest...u aint growing any younger :D ;D :D ;D

So K-online has reformed one American...from "americanism". Jack is now one of us who see something being done in a wrong way from his human perspective...not american perspective. :D ;D :D ;D

Peace must Prevail.

[kilishi]

  " FLORIDA  EXECUTES CLERGYMAN KILLER"

So death penalty is stiil in practice?????????? ??? ???

[Jack_Fulcher]

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

[EMTL]

Assalamu alaikum,
I have read the various contributions on this topic and appreaciate all the educative write ups. It is clear that people like Mr. Jark are just refusing to accept reasons and sort of use this oppurtunity to redicule Islamic injunctions. I wonder why people (like Jack) should argue about issues they lack knowledge about and does not seek to understand.

I really pity such people that preponderate their lousy common sense over and above the Almighty. I therefore pray for them Allah's (SWT) guidance. Apparently, such persons have been doomed, and are therefore deaf, dumb and dumped in the ocean of confussion. No true believer will be decieved by any delirious claims againts Islamic injunctions. The myopic judgement of man visa-vis the western propaganda due the ramification of its technological progress seems to only plunge such people into cesspool of moral and spiritual bankruptcy.

People like Mr. Jack should allow the beleivers to follow their religious injunctions. We have the right to choose Islam as our religion and practice it, Period!

Let us again seek for reasons from the Holy Qur;an and the Holy Bible to again see why dealth penalty is could never be obsolete.

Islamic (Shariah) Injunction on Aduletry/Fornication is as follows: The Holy Qur'an says: “The woman and the man (Bachelors/Spinsters) guilty of Adultery or fornication, flog each of them with a hundred stripes:” HQ S. XX V 2.

Similarly, the holy Prophet (SAW) instructed that:'For man and woman who have been married are to be stoned to death, for committing adultery. – AL-MUWATTA 41.1.1

The following is another Hadith on the ruling on fornication: The married person is to be stoned to death when the guilt is established by either four witnesses or through voluntary self-confession. It was extracted from a hadith in Al-Muwatta Malik 12 that, Malik [RL] related from bn Shihab [RL] from Ubaydullah ibn Abdullah ibn Utba ibn Masud [RL] that Abu Huraira (RA) and Zayd ibn Khalid al-Juhani (RA) informed him that two men brought a dispute to the Messenger of Allah (SAW), may Allah bless him and grant him peace. One of them said, "Messenger of Allah! Judge between us by the Book of Allah!" The other said, and he was the wiser of the two, "Yes, Messenger of Allah. Judge between us by the Book of Allah and give me permission to speak." He said, "Speak." He said, "My son was hired by this person and he committed fornication with his wife. He told me that my son deserved stoning, and I ransomed him for one hundred sheep and a slave-girl. Then I asked the people of knowledge and they told me that my son deserved to be flogged with one hundred lashes and exiled for a year, and they informed me that the woman deserved to be stoned." The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "By Him in whose Hand my soul is, I will judge between you by the Book of Allah. As for your sheep and slave girl, they should be returned to you. Your son should have one hundred lashes and be exiled for a year." He ordered Unays al-Aslami

The Holy Bible has this to say on Fornication/Adultery: The Bible says: "If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife of his neighbour-both the adulterer and the adulteress Must be put to death “ Levictus 20:10

On Murder the Shariah says:: We ordained therein for them: “ life for life, eye for eye, Nose for nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, wounds for wounds, Equal for equal…” HQ S 4. 45  

Similarly, the Bible says: “ Soul will be for soul, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, branding for branding, wound for wound, blow for blow.” Ex. 10: 24—25

If non-Muslims do not find it imperative to follow the injunctions in their holy books, we the Muslims do. Laqum dina qum waliyyadiyn.

EMTL

[lionger]

EMTL,

Your quotations on the Bible are very accurate, however, u have also exhibited a lack of understanding of the Christian faith by ultimately insinuating that Christians do not follow their Bible. If I were like some of us here I would ask u not to stick your mouth into matters u don't understand.  :P But then how would any of us learn? Inevitably the Bible would have been dragged into this argument, though Mr. Fulcher has never said he was a Christian; evidence of another generalization many of us make.

Anyways, I would like to point you to the a passage in John 8, when an adulterous woman was brought to Jesus. He did not stone her, but said those w/out sin should stone her. Even after they all backed out, He still did not condemn her, but said not to sin anymore. So if Christ did not comdemn her, then why should we? You see, Christians are called to have the nature of Christ. Of course this does not mean that adultery is no longer a sin; it still is, but instead of punishment, we show God's love, cuz as the Bible says, 'love covers a multitude of sins.' The point of Christianity is that God does not give us what we all deserve for our sins; instead He paid for it Himself thru Christ. I'll get back to the death penalty just so I don't divert the discussion too much. It is only the nature of Christ to frown at the death penalty, for the simple reason that if the covicted lives, there's still a chance that he can be saved! But I still recognise the authority of governments to use the death penalty as punishments for serious crimes, because things r different in thisrealm. Life inprisonment is a good option but do we have the facilities for that in Nigeria?

[EMTL]

Linoger,
Thanks for your response. I agree that i may not posses the complete knowledge of the christianity and should not insist that the christians should follow the injunctions in their Bible, therefore, the christians too have no business to dabble into the Islamic rules such as in the case of adultery, murder, etc.

For instance, i was shocked to learn that the Episcopalian Church approved a gay to be a Bishop. I remember the Archishop, head of the world's 70 million Angalicans shared my views and had this to say: "Difficult days lie ahead of the Episcopal church of the United States to confirm Robinson as bishop of New hampshire."

Simialrly Bsihop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania stated that, "This body has denied the plain teaching of Scripture and moral consesus of the church throughout the ages. This body has divifded itself from millions of anglicans throughout the world."

With the above developments one can understand the predicaments of the comtemporary Christians.

To very Muslim his/her faith is only complete when they totally accept the injunctions in the Holy Qur'an and the traditions of trhe Holy Prophet (SAW). Moreover the Holy Qur'an has warned us that the Christian and the Jews will be un-relenting, restless and uncompromising to the Muslims until they (the Muslims) accept their (Christian and Jews) faith.


EMTL

[Anonymous]

I think it is important to separate the debate about the death penalty into different categories. It is possble to argue that the state has to have the authority to use capital punishment in cases of behaviour which puts the state or its citizens at serious risk (treason, rebellion,terrorism etc.) or in cases of horrible murder etc.
This is very different from some weak or tempted person committing adultery.

I am firmly with Lionger on this one. " Let the one among you without sin throw the first stone."

[EMTL]

We Muslims belief in both the Holy Bible (origional version) and the Holy Qur'an as being revealed books from Allah (SWT). But the injunctions in the Holy Qur'an are binding to Muslims not the Bilble.

EMTL