We have yet another example of the perversity of justice under Sharia law. The latest case comes out of Iran where university students have filed a criminal complaint against famed actress Leila Hatami, who recently starred in the Oscar-winning film, A Separation. Some Iranians were outraged when Hatami accepted a customary peck on the cheek from Gilles Jacob, the President of Cannes Festival, as she arrived at Cannes Film Festival to serve as a member of the prestigious jury. Not only is such a sign of affection a crime in the Islamic Republic but (gasp) Hatami was wearing a head scarf that did not entirely cover her hair from being seen by men. She is now subject to jail and flogging under article 638 of Islamic Criminal Justice. The Sharia law calls for 50 lashes.
One would think that a nation like Iran would be overwhelmed with pride at the success of a citizen on the international stage. Hatami is one of just five women members on the Palme d’Or prize jury. However, in a country where women are segregated and flogged in the name of Islamic morality, many view Hatami with disgust and anger. That includes the Hizbullah Students, a group of university students with links to Iran’s Revolutionary Guard that first brought the criminal complaint. They are demanding that Hatami be flogged.
The petition, supported by many officials and citizens, declared “We, the undersigned, who are a group of student Muslim brothers and sisters, ask the cultural and media branch of the judiciary to prosecute Leyla Hatami for her sinful act of kissing a strange man in public, which according to article 638 of Islamic Criminal Justice carries a prison sentence. Furthermore, the action of this film star has hurt the religious sentiments of the proud and martyrs breeding nation of Iran and as such we also demand the punishment of flogging for her as stipulated in the law.”
Hatami has been denounced in the media as committing a “an affront to the chastity of women in Iran” and Hossein Nushabadi, Iran’s deputy minister of culture, declared Hatami to be in open “violation of religious beliefs.” He went on to say that she had disgraced the nation and the faith by such an immoral act and that, unlike Hatami, “Iranian woman is the symbol of chastity and innocence.” And of course Iranian courts are the symbol of cruelty and ignorance.
Source: Telegraph
Dredd – is ‘reich-wing’ a Lakoff tactic?
Dredd – so you agree the Ninth Circuit is the most overturned?
Paul Schulte
Laser – think of it this way. The Ninth Circuit is the most overturned Circuit. They do not have to agree with the District judge to begin with. If they do, the SC loves to bench slap them.
===================
That is since the reich-wing became the supreme five.
The Ninth is by far the largest circuit, so percentage is the factor to look at, not just the traffic affirmed or reversed.
The art of lying being as American as apple pie described by the Ninth Circuit case of U.S. v. Alvarez was upheld by the Supremes.
They know their lying.
Thanks Paul;
We have over 100 felony violations (most documented solely by fed records); because they believed they had gotten away with it all (leaving a paper trail blind babies could follow).
Truth is immortal and inflexible.
I simply must continue to wield the sword of truth until justice comes.
As Samuel Adams is quoted as saying;
Annie
Paul, YOUR perception is flawed, I can’t help that.
==========================
Professor Lakoff points out:
(Comparing a Meme Complex to a Cultural Amygdala, quoting video lecture at bottom). Of course the professor means all of us when he uses the plural “you”.
The culture and/or sub-cultures that our brains grew circuits in determine what we can and can’t think.
Making new circuits is very laborious.
Lakoff is trying to frame the progressive argument. Why should I even begin to read him?
http://www.radicalmiddle.com/x_lakoff.htm
feynman;
Thanks for the kind words.
It was not as bad as one might surmise; because of the pattern of behavior of the opposing parties. My trial dates would have been set after the June 2, 2014 hearing. They simply can’t permit a trial to occur; because my evidence is profuse, overwhelming and irrefutable (chiefly federal archives and court docket records contradictory {even have confessions to intentional fraud on the court deceptions}).
They are predictable.
Question is, how to go forward. Appeal is a right; but the judge already signed an oath (falsity) to the Ninth Circuit, stating my case was filed in bad faith.
It ain’t easy – taking down big sleazy!
Laser – think of it this way. The Ninth Circuit is the most overturned Circuit. They do not have to agree with the District judge to begin with. If they do, the SC loves to bench slap them.
po
Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I hope you can continue to teach us about Islam.
Thanks, feynman and angrymanspeaks. I believe in the value of informing, and of learning, and of critiquing and criticizing, all of which however based on facts or real information. Whenever we react to any boogieman, we are either a child or one who is letting emotions take over intellectual faculties. People like you keep me coming back to this site, not looking for agreement but for listening and hearing, for the value of any argument relies foremost on it being heard.
Thanks for the question, feynman, it denotes a genuine wish to know on your part, rather than the tendency on these pages, unfortunately, for some to comment relentlessly on things they know little about.
There are indeed similarities between all the revealed religions in what fields of study they spur. Just as there are scholars who dedicate themselves solely to the study of the Talmud, and others solely to studying the Bible, there are Muslims scholars who dedicate themselves solely to the study of the Quran.
The difference however, is that although one may study the Quran in depth and tries to get a holistic, comprehensive understanding of it, the traditions demanded that one may speak legitimately on the Quran only after a lifetime of study of the various sciences that compose the Quran and Islam.
The traditional student of Islam would seek to master arabic grammar, (which is incredibly complex and rich, one word may hold a dozen different meanings depending on how it is used, which explains the great variety of interpretations of some verses), before mastering the science of hadith (sayings of the Prophet as reported by his contemporaries), the science of tajweed (proper pronunciation of the verses), and the science of tafseer (interpretation of the meanings of the verses, because as some verses are very clear, many aren’t obvious in their meaning).
The 4 imams, for example, who are the founders of the 4 established schools of practice in sunni Islam, were the foremost masters of their time in their knowledge of each of those sciences, along with many others sometimes, which allowed them to establish a religious practice that studied the quran from many different sides. Where an extremist for example might read the verse “kill them wherever you find them” and legitimate his use of terrorism, these Imams and the similarly learned would tell them that one cannot read one verse without reading the one before it AND the one after it, for the one before might say “if they attack you” and the following verse might say “but if you forgive them, that is better in the sight of your Lord.”
The interpretation of the QUran does tend to remain fixed, because the books of hadith (transmitted sayings of the Prophet), and the books of tafseer (verse by verse interpretation) we use are from centuries ago and were written by people who were masters of those specific fields (and usually of those fields only, which doesn’t change the fact that many of those collected hadiths have been deemed false).
There is a strong movement currently that seeks to reframe these works according to our times, and tries to strip them of their cultural baggage and patriarchial and racial biases.
Women want more say in their religion, so do gays, and young people are more rational and less compliant than before, and ask to be shown rather than being told. One woman scholar(black american convert) even translated the Quran according to a feminist view, and she is among a great many who actually see a feminist bent to the Quran.
An example of this principle at play is that I never believed that God would allow the husband to beat his wife, especially when He suggested you forgive your worse enemy his worse offence. My research led me to a study that tracked each instance of that word being used in the Quran in order to show that it could only logically mean “to report”, as in to complain to the one in authority (judge) before the proceedings for divorce were started.
Obviously, a scholar who lived in a patriachial arabic society where men had total dominion over women would never need/think to challenge the meaning of that word. Similarly, another person challenged the accepted meaning of “cutting the hand of the thief” based on not only the tendency of the quran to lean towards mercy, but also towards practicality, and cutting a hand would cause a harm greater than the crime, which is totally frown upon by Allah.
Now, an Islamic judge from a modern society would interpret the verses a bit differently than one in rural Pakistan or Sudan. Hence while the latter might prescribe stoning (which is not in the quran), the former might suggest a fine.
But regarding either, the quran, the hadith and fiqh (jurisprudence that informs shariah law), all the traditional knowledge is being challenged, and one prominent schjolar just called for a moratorium on the death penalty in islamic countries as more studies are conducted in order to arrive to a consensus devoid of the traditional cultural baggage.
Here is an essay I was reading earlier than should add more light to the issue.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nancy-graham-holm/debate-moderate-vs-islam_b_5378000.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
po
Thanks for the post.
Would it be reasonable to think of Sharia law as something like the study of the Talmud? Are there scholars who devote themselves to the study of the Quran or Sharia law? Does the interpretation of the Quran or Sharia tend to remain fixed or are they constantly open to change?
Karen S
Most Muslims do not practice nor live under shariah law. Find me the most populous Muslim country and I’ll show you it does not practice shariah law. Any way what is shariah law? Sure, it is inspired by the Quran, but most of it is based on human interpretation and deduction. When the Quran suggests the rules of inheritance, shariah law uses deduction and consensus (based also on contemporary cultural mores) to take it as far as it needs to go (for example should the grandparents inherit and how much). When the Quran suggests a punishment for a crime, shariah law uses deduction, consensus and contemporary cultural mores to take it as far it needs to go, for every case of a crime committed.
When the Quran tells us to support a woman while the couple goes through a divorce, shariah law completes the gap by determining, through the sunna, deduction and consensus, and contemporary cultural mores, how much she gets and where can she be can housed, and for how long…etc.
Comparing it to our own judicial system, the courts in Texas are not necessarily codified the same as the courts in California, and the same crime may incur different sentences based on the jurisdiction. A judge gets to decide how much a woman is entitled to in the case of a divorce, in an islamic court, a judge gets the same power to decide. A shariah law court based in the US would have to be informed by local law. Shariah law could not break local law. If this shariah court found one guilty of theft and wanted to cut a hand, it could not because that would break any local law.
So it is time we stop referring to Shariah law as that all encompassing thing that defines everything islamic. It is simply a code for living that also includes the rules for punishment. And as I said many times before, the rules of punishment being based on 4 trustworthy witnesses, plus the refusal of the person found guilty to repent, the worst applications of it (flogging for adultery and cutting hands for theft (which is interpreted differently by many sides), should never need be applied.
For every occurrence of the call to apply shariah law to any specific case, a quick search would reveal support for and against it., using the same sources and sometimes the same arguments. Flogging that actress for that kiss is not shariah law, it is Iranian law, which is based on Islamic law, which is a judicial system inspired by suggestions for punishment found in the quran, which are expanded harshly or mildly based on the locale’s tendency towards political reaction and patriarchy. There.
Po
I don’t know you but that may be the most clear and concise description of Shariah Law that I have encountered.
Most laws are based on common sense. Those that are not are usually laws that benefit a special class or category of people or persecute the same.
People fear what they do not know and they refuse to get to know what they fear.
Sadly; while America is often touted as the place where being different is normal and accepted; in reality America expects everyone to conform to “The American Way”.
“The American Way” is the conglomeration of laws and customs that we have gathered from all over the world and from all eras of time and codified for our use.
We may claim that our laws are based on English Common Law but it turns out that a lot of laws have been consistent through the centuries.
Fear and intolerance rear their ugly heads yet again.
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 9:28 PM, JONATHAN TURLEY wrote:
> po @ minutebol commented: “Karen S Most Muslims do not practice nor > live under shariah law. Find me the most populous Muslim country and I’ll > show you it does not practice shariah law. Any way what is shariah law? > Sure, it is inspired by the Quran, but most of it is based on human” >
Paul, YOUR perception is flawed, I can’t help that.
Paul, think about it, would someone really indicate that ALL the males were a threat? Really? That doesn’t make sense, you are back on your quota.
Paul, sorry, but I can’t help you out with your reading comprehension.
Annie – perception is reality.
Afghan workers are NOT on base at night. So the threat of rape would not be coming from them.
And Karen, if it is disturbing to hear that males are raping their female counterparts in the military and women are told how to be safe, then perhaps you can understand how disturbing is to them while serving. She never indicated and I never indicated that EVERY male was considered a threat. Rapists don’t wear a sign that identifies them as such.
Annie – I read your posts as indicating that ALL the males were threats.
The Pentagon estimated there were 26,000 cases of unwanted sexual contact in 2012, which is a significant increase over the 19,000 estimated assaults in 2011. In addition, 62 percent of sexual assault victims in the military claim they faced retaliation for reporting the criminal behavior.
Here is the link:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/margaret-mclean/rape-in-the-military-its-_b_4985024.html
Karen,
Did I indicate that her fellow military members were the GREATEST threat to her while in Afgahnistan?! Talk about mischaracterization. Regarding walking alone to latrines after dark, it was indicated to her that is was her fellow male military members that were considered the threat. This was told to all females upon entering Camp Leatherneck. I never relate anything my daughter has told me with my own spin on it Karen.
I’m sure I would not compare a college campus with a military camp in Afghanistan.
Sadly, rape happens frequently in the military.
UK Law:
Polygamous marriages may not be performed in the United Kingdom, and if a polygamous marriage is performed, the already-married person may be guilty of the crime of bigamy.
Polygamous marriages legally performed in another country where the law allows it are not recognized for pension, immigration or citizenship purposes.[1] However, they may be recognized for the purposes of welfare benefits. This decision was not made without controversy, and there have been protests against
Out of curiosity, does your daughter approve of your characterization of her service, that her fellow military were the greatest threat to her?