The Stoning Of Soraya M. is a true story.
The story of the live stoning to death of an innocent Iranian mother came first to light in a book written by a French journalist who had received the manuscript for it from an eyewitness. The movie by the same name came out a couple of years ago; Rogers Video got the DVD. I would urge you to see it.
The title reveals part of storyline but not the essence of the story. The storyline is straight forward: a husband desires to take a young teenage girl as his new wife; rejection of his paltry divorce proposal leads him to connive the killing of his wife by falsely accusing her of adultery for which sharia law prescribes for the woman the death penalty.
The essence of The Stoning Of Soraya M. lies in several salient points:
- The absolute dehumanising message that underlies the ?judicial? tenets of Islam , that reach far beyond mere contempt of women.
- It takes for instance four independent male voices to verify that adultery has happened, female voices count only half , so deck is stacked against a defending woman.
- Even father and brother/s of an of adultery accused woman will call her ?****? and will throw stones at her , but the bottom of the ethical abyss that sharia law represents, lies in the dehumanising expectation, that even the son/s of a ?convicted? adulteress calls his mother ?****? and to kill her with throwing stones at her - stones specially selected to cause the most pain.
If all that would not have been often and independently reported , one could rightly object that this is merely a book or a movie that for the sake of sensationalizing, exaggerates. Tragically , this is not the case.
Survivors of Auschwitz have reported the systematic dehumanisation of prisoners of concentration camp by Nazis. It seems to me, that Nazi and Islamic methods of control have more in common than one would expect.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4427004/the_stoning_of_soraya_m/http://www.whentheshipcomesin.com/stoning-of-soraya-m-2008
The status of women's testimony in Islam is disputed.
In cases of hudud, punishments for serious crimes, 12th-century Maliki jurist Averroes wrote that jurists disagree about the status of women's testimony.[1] According to Averroes, most scholars say that in this case women's testimony is unacceptable regardless of whether they testify alongside male witnesses.[1]
Hudud penalties for these cases are not punishments tailored to the offense, but are intended to be deterrents, setting an example for the general public and prosecuting the most flagrant violations. The process is extremely exacting: at least two witnesses are required to corroborate the evidence, with four witnesses required in the case of sex crimes, so that in most such cases the most severe penalties are difficult, if not impossible, to impose. Circumstantial evidence is not allowed to be part of the testimony. When the severest penalties are imposed, the case is usually so obvious, obscene or flagrant that conviction is virtually inevitable.
In accordance with hadith, stoning to death is the penalty for married men and women who commit adultery. In addition, there are several conditions related to the person who commits it that must be met. One of the difficult ones is that the punishment cannot be enforced unless there is a confession of the person, or four male eyewitnesses who each saw the act being committed. All of these must be met under the scrutiny of judicial authority[123] For unmarried men and women, the punishment prescribed in the Quran and hadith is 100 lashes.[124]
Home
Search
Login
Register