We have another grotesque application of Sharia law out of Saudi Arabia. A court in Medina has applied Islamic law to sentence a man to three years in jail and 450 lashes for being gay. The unnamed 24-year-old man was arrested after a sting operation by the notorious Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice (CPVPV) where they arranged a meeting over social media.
The man’s cellphone reportedly revealed incriminating pictures and he confessed. He was then found guilty of “promoting the vice and practice of homosexuality.”
The court noted that he had “indecent images” and “pornographic images of homosexual perversion.”
The barbaric 450 lashes will be meted out in 15 sessions. That’s right, 30 lashes a session to satisfy God’s will for being gay.
He can consider himself lucky under Sharia law. If he were married, he could have been stoned to death. Other punishments for simply being gay include chemical castrations, imprisonment and execution.
73 thoughts on “Saudi Court Hands Down Sharia Sentence To Gay Man: 3 years in Jail and 450 Lashes”
Hiv is spreading at a faster rate among straight black females than that of gay males. Many straight people have babies that they can not afford and they impact our society. Should we stone them too.
Nope. I will just stay in Texas. Plus, I kind of like my little lady thingy being attached. Never can tell when I might need it.
Well Squeekers, I don’t think you’d like living in Saudi Arabia. It’s hot and dusty.
Annie – I live where it is hot and dusty. You get used to the dry heat. Mosquitoes are small and few. Winters are great. You never have to shovel sun. 🙂
Well, in America I don ‘t have the right. But the Saudis do in their own country and a bunch of filth and disease is not high on their bucket list.
Squeeky, no one said you had to respect promiscuous people. You do not however, have the right to legislate their morality. You’ll just have to be patient and wait for the Theocracy and then you can be a morality police lady, maybe they’ll let yo have a switch you can beat those sluts and hound dogs with. Woo hoo!
I like to think I get my ideas from the Universe of Sanity, where some idiot’s “right” to have casual sex with a thousand different partners is accorded all the respect it deserves. None.
Squeeky’s mandate comes from nutritionists?! 😯
Why is my comment awaiting moderation. There are NO, None, count them, not one forbidden words.
From what inverse universe does Squeeky Fromm get her ideas? And not so much her “ideas” which she is very welcome to espouse…but her ideas about how to enforce those ideas upon the rest of us, all according to Squeeky is being done for our own good.
Kris – her mandate comes from the same place the Michelle Obama got hers to enforce her dietary rules on school children.
When Saudi’s try to flee the country, they could run into persecution in the US:
Speaking pf morality laws…
… Morality of the human spirit wins out!
Uganda court annuls anti-homosexuality law
Petition the government for redress of grievances.
All grievances or only liberal/collectivist grievances du jour?
Herein, one citizen’s grievance is a rejection of perversion of natural activity.
The opposing citizen’s grievance is rejection of first citizen’s unnatural activity.
Grievances cannot be considered legitimate if there is an opposing grievance. Most grievances must be rejected as frivolous and are not the purview of government and the expenditure or tax dollars to address them is not justified. The government shall be neutral and not impose religion doctrine. America is not a theocracy.
Not one moment of time of governmental operations or one penny of tax revenue should be expended on consensual sexual activity or coveting and begrudging the property of another.
A hard working businessman hires whomever he choses as help. The government tells him whom to hire. The businessman’s grievance is that he built and owns his business which is his private property. The prospective employee’s grievance is that he can’t force the owner of the business to hire him. That is not a valid grievance, it is coveting. Thou shalt not covet.
A landlord choses his renters. The government tells the landlord whom to rent to. The landlord’s grievance is that of an owner of private property having the right to decide its disposition. The renter’s grievance is he wants property that he does not own. The renter has absolutely no legitimate grievance. He has jealousy. He covets the owner’s property.
The Preamble, Constitution and Bill of Rights have to be assimilated as a trilogy; a continuum. These documents have to be considered with the reality that the Framers actually lived. Did the Founders address every imaginable complaint of every single citizen to be grievances? I think not.
The Founders were aware that thou shalt not covet and that freedom is achieved through self-reliance. I have not researched the views of the Founders on consensual sexual activity. Have you? Really?
The inmates have taken over the asylum.
The fact that AIDS is not the death sentence it once was because of expensive drug cocktails is a double edged sword. Many fewer people are dying, which is good, but the narcissistic, promiscuous, gay culture is sliding back to risky behavior again. I have some in-laws that are gay. One is a Christian minister and did the marriage ceremony for our daughter and his nephew. He is shocked @ how young people just don’t seem to give a rat’s ass. Here’s the rub. Those drug cocktails that keep HIV positive men alive are expensive. Many go on Medicaid and I end up paying for their narcissistic, promiscuous lifestyle and it’s consequences. That is rewarding negative behavior.
But Squeeky, I think Hillary might be a big disappointment to you. I doubt she’d be on board with your Christian Utopia. Perhaps you should start a ‘Draft Sarah Palin for Prez’ movement?
It’s refreshing to see you bare your soul Squeekers. At least you admit it. All the religious rightists should be so open and honest about their plans for morality laws when they get their Theocracy. What’s your stance on blasphemy laws Squeeky?
Hmmm. Maybe so, and I could become your worst nightmare!!! Think, adulterers in scarlet vests out on the highway picking up garbage! Teenagers being taught chastity in school! Porn taken off the cable TV and internet. Gays being forced into monogamous marriages with none of that Special Gay Snowflake Marriage nonsense! Oh, I can just hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth now.
Paul – So, education about sex = promotion of promiscuity? Following that type of flawed reasoning means that education about science/logic = promotion of free thinking. Oh, I guess that is dangerous!
Should society ban educating people about all topics you consider inappropriate? Only certain topics? What about topics you consider appropriate but someone else considers inappropriate?
Even if PP did promote promiscuity–and, to clear, it does not, I would much prefer that to the sexually repressed religious nonsense I was force fed as a teenager. Teaching our next generation reality would be a giant leap over mythology.
Charlie – PP is teaching more than it should about sex. And there is the reality that curiosity killed the cat. Since PP does not suggest moral structure on sexuality they are advocating a certain amount of promiscuity. Sadly, the rate of STDs in teenagers continues to climb.
Comments are closed.