Rank: Veteran Joined: 7/5/2010 Posts: 2,061 Location: Nairobi
|
AlphDoti wrote:quicksand wrote:AlphDoti wrote:tycho wrote:AlphDoti wrote:FOR YOU ALL
1. Just because somebody accusing somebody of fornication or spreading corruption does not mean automatic application of the law. No, not like that.
2. Islamic law requires that there be four witnesses for the application of this law.
3. The witnesses must be reliable witnesses, not just anybody.
Just and righteous people. And without reliable four witnesses, the law cannot be applied.
4. That's why the number of cases of people executed, in the last 1400 years to today, they are very, very few. They can be counted.
5. The evidence can be: confession, or recordings, or video evidence, or a woman gets pregant and gives birth to a baby, she becomes pregnant while her husband is away or not married etc.
6. Where there is clear evidence, the law will apply.
#BringTheRuling This is a process and ritual, but it's not necessarily foolproof, especially when the idea that supports it is questionable. For example, take wazua's quote of the day, "How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg "- Abraham Lincoln @tycho what is questionable? Islamic law is Law of God. Only God knows what is right and beneficial for His creation, and alternatively what is wrong and harmful. The Quran clearly states the lawful and unlawful actions. All Humans must follow this Law of God which is known as the 'Shariah' or Islamic Law. Your problem is not the law, your problem is, you don't believe it is from God. So right there is the problem. Even if it were not about this woman, it would have been something else. The part that says "there is no compulsion" is also from God, is it not? I have not read anywhere that there was evidence she spoke against Islam. She claimed to never having been a muslim in the first place!Therefore this treason charge you have levied does not pass muster. In essence, it boils down to this: You are free to leave Islam, but if you do, we will kill you. And you are so convinced she is guilty, it is frightening. In your realm, there is no one to defend innocent people against those who wilfully misinterpret law and abuse it. And you think the judge is mad, this is what is in your mind! @quicksand and that's where I tell you people are just speculating without knowing the exact ruling by the judge. There must have been a case. The judge must have made a ruling. The position is: You're free to leave Islam, but don't commit treason against Islam by preaching falsehood. Because how many people have left Islam? And how many have been executed? very, very countable. What I have been doing is explain the law of apostasy. Where is that ruling for you to be convinced she didn't commit treason? If I am speculating, so are you. Where is the evidence that she spoke against Islam other than your assumption that "there must have been people in the court who were convinced she did". Were you there? The Sudanese or the relatives who threw her to the wolves are infallible now? There is not even the slightest possibility that Islamic law can be abused? False charges brought, corruption, justice denied? The judge gave her 3 days to change her mind and come back to the Islamic fold. Why? If she had really committed treason, would this reprieve be offered?
|