Top Menu

Salah Al-Nasrawi: A Lesson From Iran: Islamic Sharia is Flexible After All

Stop Stoning

It might surprise many to learn the Qur’an never commands “stoning,” though death by stoning is specified as a punishment numerous times in the Bible:

For taking “accursed things”

Achan … took of the accursed thing. … And all Israel stoned him with stones, and burned them with fire, after they had stoned them with stones. … So the LORD turned from the fierceness of his anger. Joshua 7:1-26

For cursing or blaspheming

And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him. Leviticus 24:16

For adultery

If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city. Deuteronomy 22:23-24

For animals

“If a bull gores a man or woman to death, the bull is to be stoned to death, and its meat must not be eaten. But the owner of the bull will not be held responsible. Exodus 21:28

For a woman who is not a virgin on her wedding night

If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her … and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid: Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel’s virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate: And the damsel’s father shall say … these are the tokens of my daughter’s virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city. … But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she dieDeuteronomy 22:13-21

For worshipping other gods

If there be found among you … that … hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them … Then shalt thou … stone them with stones, till they die. Deuteronomy 17:2-5

If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers … thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die. Deuteronomy 13:5-10

For disobeying parents

If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother … Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city … And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he dieDeuteronomy 21:18-21

For witches and wizards

A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them. Leviticus 20:27

For giving your children to Molech

Whosoever … giveth any of his seed unto Molech; he shall surely be put to death: the people of the land shall stone him with stonesLeviticus 20:2

For breaking the Sabbath

They found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day. … And the LORD said unto Moses, the man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones…. And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded MosesNumbers 15:32-56

For cursing the king

Thou didst blaspheme God and the king. And then carry him out, and stone him, that he may die1 Kings 21:10

In the modern world, it’s Muslim-majority countries, including Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Afghanistan, that have become infamous for brutal punishments, including stoning. Ignoring dozens of Muslim-majority countries that don’t engage in such practices, anti-Muslim bigots constantly shine a spotlight on the most regressive regimes, leaving the public with the impression harsh punishments are an inevitable feature of Islamic Law.

Yet Iran has recently passed a law abolishing stoning as a punishment for adultery. As fixated as the major media usually are on that country, the story has attracted relatively scant coverage–and predictably, it’s been completely ignored by hate sites devoted to demonizing Muslims and generating hysteria about “creeping sharia.”

A lesson from Iran: Islamic Sharia is flexible after all

by Salah Al-Nasrawi, Ahram (Egypt)

A new law by the Islamic Republic of Iran to abolish stoning to death for adulterers passed last month has been received with a lot of skepticism in the West and little attention in the Arab and Islamic world.

But the ruling could have a significant bearing on the debate about the role of Islamic Sharia as Islamic groups gain power throughout the Middle East with many of them aspire to see Islamic jurisdiction as the law of the land.

Iran’s Guardian Council and Iranian parliament have approved an amendment to the country’s penal code by removing all executions by stoning which will come into effect once signed by the country’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Under Iran’s old penal code, stoning to death was one of the sentences applied for adultery. Iranian activists who campaigned against the practice said at least 99 men and women have been executed by stoning over the last 30 years.

The stoning sentence against Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, a 45-year-old Iranian woman, on charges of adultery and murder in 2006 has turned the spotlight on Iran as one of very few countries which adopts Sharia, or Islamic law.

The concept was equated in the West and among Muslim secularists with a variety of retributions including stoning of adulterers, chopping of limbs of thieves, death in blasphemy cases and restrictions on rights of women and minorities.

Ashtiani’s was convicted of having an “illicit relationship” with two men after the murder of her husband and was sentenced to 99 lashes. The verdict led to an international condemnation which has made Tehran delay carrying out the sentence.

While Ashtiani’s case points to a larger divide between the West and Iran, the punishment of the mother of two has highlighted how the contentious issue is a practice that has largely survived through centuries’ long cultural heritage.

The sentence, and now its abolishment, renewed a theological controversy in Islam on whether the harsh punishment is God’s commands, or a man-made effort to interpret Islamic Sharia, or Islamic law.

The case has spilled over into larger and even more complex issues within Islamic discourse, such as what consist Sharia, and if it is compatible with modern day human rights standards.

Most of Iran’s legal code was based on the constitution enacted under guidance of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, after the 1979 Islamic revolution that toppled secular regime of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

The document declared Iran as a Muslim nation whose laws are derived from Islamic Sharia, which it defines as God’s “exclusive sovereignty and the right to legislate”, based on God’s commands in Quran and Sunnah, which is Prophet’s Mohammad’s teachings.

Sharia is still wide open for judgment under Islamic principle of Ijtihad. The term means an endeavor of a Muslim scholar to derive a rule of divine law from the Quran and Prophet Mohammad’s heritage.

Since the Islamic revolution some Iranian clerics have said stoning should be stopped because it may harm the reputation of Islam or the Islamic nation.

Others believed stoning is a divine punishment.

Some Muslim scholars believe stoning to death was never contemplated by Islam as a punishment for the act of adultery since the Quran does not even mention the word “stoning” or ‘death by stoning in any of its verses.

According to the Holy book of Islam all sexual intercourse outside the marital bond is considered sinful. Some scholars say Quran makes no distinction between adultery and fornication; in both cases the punishment is flogging to those found guilty.

In Quran verse “The Light (24:2) says: “The adulteress and the adulterer shall each be given a hundred lashes. Let no pity for them to cause you to disobey Allah.”

On the other hand, many Islamic legal scholars and judges agree that the Quranic text does not refer to executions by stoning but state they are part of the Sunnah.  They say there is no necessity that all orders of Sharia to be mentioned in Quran, one by one.

Other clerics say that even if stoning was practiced by Prophet Mohammad and his immediate followers it cannot be enforced nowadays. They believe stoning is a part of Islamic law but only the Prophet and his immediate successors are authorized or qualified to order and implement it.

In theory, stoning to death is still enacted in laws of countries which apply Islamic Sharia, such as Saudi Arabia, and Sudan. It has been also carried out in the previous Taliban-ruled Afghanistan and some parts of Nigeria.

Iran’s amendment of the penal code is believed to have been adopted in response to international criticism of its violations of human rights. It also coincides with mounting tension with the West over its nuclear program and increasing fear of a military conflict.

Critics, however, say the new code still considers adultery for married persons as a crime, although it doesn’t designate any specific punishment for it, leaving that for the judge to rely on a fatwa by a reliable cleric. Human rights organizations argued that such measures were inadequate and insisted that real change in the law is necessary.

Whether Iran wants to improve its human rights record or it is trying to ward off increasing Western pressure, the revision of its Islamic law now remains highly significant from both political and theological standpoints.

As Islamic groups gain power throughout the Middle East, the role of Sharia is coming under increased focus. Modernist forces in Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia were shocked by the remarkable collective rise to power of these parties and the sudden transformation of their civil states into states with budding theocratic inclinations.

While fundamentalist movements, such Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, Tunisia’s Enhhada Party and the Justice and Development Party in Morocco speak about a broadly defined application of Sharia as “a main source” for legislation, other ultra-orthodox groups want a full-fledged Islamic legal code.

Yet there are increasing signs that show Islamic groups in these countries want more religion than previously admitted. Multiple reports and research works are suggesting that these countries are evolving towards more conservative rules and an Islamisation of social life.

There have already been calls from some Islamists to close down the tourist sites and to impose Islamic dress codes on the costal resorts. Women are also worried that political Islam might impose new restrictions on them such as forcing them to wear the Hijab (veil) and restrict their personal freedom.

Christians, a religious minority in the countries recently taken over by Islamists, complain of more intolerance and say they fear for their safety after increased cases of sectarian violence and discrimination.

Many secularists and liberals in Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco, and other countries now want to see their next constitutions to have solid guarantees of democratic and civic commitments.

Here comes the Iranian experiment of abolishing a deep rooted Islamic concept of retribution and the lesson to be drawn from that by newly empowered Islamic groups in these three Arab countries and perhaps in others that will soon follow.

In Egypt, where the debate will open soon on drafting a new constitution, focus will increase on the role of Sharia in the country’s political and social life, especially in balancing Islam with democracy, personal freedom and modernity.

Although it is generally agreed among mainstream political groups that Sharia is the point of reference in legislation, the challenge will remain about how to distinguish what directly comes from the Quran and Sunnah from man-made interpretation of God’s revelations and the Prophet’s teachings.

Article 2 of Iran’s constitution provides such a room for maneuverability by combining both Ijtihad by qualified Faqih, or scholar(s) and the resort to “sciences, arts and the most advanced results of human experience” with Quran and Sunnah in legislation.

Under such overwhelming circumstances, the most liberal, secularists and reform minded Egyptian Muslims can argue for is that any stipulation of Islamic Sharia in the new constitution should provide flexibility, so that Islamic laws should be viewed and amended in light of time and changing circumstances.

, , , , , , , ,

  • InPeace

    @Michal Elwood:

    Most Islamic according to who?

    Their legal system, constitution, so-on, obviously.

    The legal system of Saudi Arabia is based on Sharia, Islamic law derived from the Qu’ran and the Sunnah (the traditions) of the Prophet Muhammad. The sources of Sharia also include Islamic scholarly consensus developed after Muhammad’s death and analogical reasoning by Muslim judges. Its interpretation by judges in Saudi Arabia is influenced by the medieval texts of the literalist Hanbali school of Islamic jurisprudence.

    The passage is from Wikipedia. Let me if any of the above is incorrect.

    If a country has a bunch of laws that contradict the Quran on adultery, apostasy, blasphemy, and a host of other things

    Looks like you’re ignoring Islam’s rich interpretative tradition.

    Islam is not a book but a reflection of the beliefs of its adherents more than anything.

    Sorry, but you’re using the same argument that “Islamophobes” are accused of making. You can cite any passage you like from the Koran, but that does not necessarily align with what Islam actually is based on the beliefs and practices of her adherents.

  • JT

    “But I like how everyone has basically overlooked the fact that awareness raised about the brutal laws in Iran by the “Islamophobes” was the catalyst for Iran’s parliament ending stoning (supposedly).”

    That’s not true. The article makes that point and I higlighted it as well. So it’s not some kind of secret that we’re trying to suppress.

  • Susanna

    @ Sir David

    The new law of Christ (New Covenant) is the divine love, as brought into the renewed heart by the Holy Spirit to the objects of the divine love. It is, therefore, the law that gives freedom in contrast with the external law of Moses. Moses’ law demands love, Christ’s law is love and so takes the place of the external law by fulfilling it ( Matthew 5: 17). It is the law written in the heart under the New Covenant.

    I was responding to the “Old Testament” cop out article presented by llisha.
    While the external laws demanding punishment in breaches of morality were harsh, it was God’s judgement for disobedience. But under the new covenant there can be no reason to consider them, since we have an internal law of the heart.

  • Michael Elwood

    @john spielman

    “Dear Sam Seed: all 5 shcools of sharia law agree that apostasy and blasphemy against Islam and Mohammed warrants the death penalty.”

    MuslimahMediaWatch recently had a post asking people what were their suggestions about writing about Muslims. One of my suggestions was to not use the “all schools” argument:

    http://www.patheos.com/blogs/mmw/2012/04/so-how-do-you-write-about-muslims/#comment-12705

    @InPeace

    “It’s also Iran and Saudi Arabia that are the most Islamic.”

    Most Islamic according to who? You? When did you become the arbiter of what is and what isn’t Islamic? The Quran calls itself the furqaan, or criterion. Because anything that agrees with it is Islamic, and anything that doesn’t agree with it isn’t Islamic. If a country has a bunch of laws that contradict the Quran on adultery, apostasy, blasphemy, and a host of other things, how is that country more Islamic than countries that don’t have those laws? Because you say so?

    By the way, aren’t Uganda, Rwanda, and other developing countries, more Christian than Western countries on homosexuality, adultery, witchcraft, etc?

  • Sir David ( Illuminati membership number 16.69

    Hello Susanna
    Back again ? So soon
    I see there is no show without punch.
    Who is this ” we follow the new covenant “? Just so everyone is clear where you are coming from 🙂
    Not that you would try to steer this thread in a direction only you would like . It would be nice if you mention the subject of the thread at some point soon.

  • Susanna

    Again, I see the same old arguments about the Bible OT and NT teachings. John S. is on the right track here. Moses was given commandments and laws for his people entering into the land he had promised them. They were to be the model for God’s righteous living. Because the nations living in the area who worshipped idols,committed atrocities such as fornication, homosexuality, and most awful sacrifice of their children to their gods, the Hebrews were given these laws to mold them to God,s righteousness. The core of the commandments was the Ten Commandments. This Law would stand until the end of time. Jesus fulfilled the Law by taking the punishment for ours sins by dying on the cross. The wages of sin is death.

    In the NT look to Matthew 22: 36-38 ..an expert on the law tested him with a question, Teacher which is the greatest commandment in the Law? Jesus replied; Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and the greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments. Notice is says all the Law. Again, in Mark 12:29-31 Jesus replies in the same way but adds ..there is no commandment greater than these. In John 13: 34 Jesus says, A new commandment I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another. Thus begins the New Covenant under Jesus Christ.
    we follow the new covenant. OT scripture was meant to teach, rebuke and correct and to prophecy of a Redeemer.

  • dan15

    Iran practices Sharia? Might as well give that news to the many hardline Sunnis who think Iran does not practice Sharia to begin with as they are Shi’a.

  • InPeace

    Also, do you know there are about 50 Muslin countries in the world? Islamophobes love to take the most regressive examples from Saudi Arabia and Iran and say, “this is Islam!” That’s like pointing to Terry Jones and saying, “this is Christianity!”

    It’s also Iran and Saudi Arabia that are the most Islamic. So, it’s hardly unfair to make that criticism.

    But I like how everyone has basically overlooked the fact that awareness raised about the brutal laws in Iran by the “Islamophobes” was the catalyst for Iran’s parliament ending stoning (supposedly).

  • @ John Speilman

    The only part of your comment that has not been dealt with is the ‘let him who is without sin cast the first stone,” which is a later fabrication. It is part of a passage that does not exist in the oldest of manuscripts, and did not begin to surface in copies until over a century after according to textual critics of the manuscripts. eg. Bart Erhman.

  • Sir David ( Illuminati membership number 16.69

    nice one Ilesha !
    I always think it amusing when Islamaphobes mix the worst of everything they can find about Islam in any country vaguely muslim and say it applies to every muslim in the world all the time . What would they say if the same was applied to Christianity ?
    We would have gays all to be killed , priests molesting every young boy ,child witches killed , blood transfusions illeagal , tiething 10% of everyones wages , public parks closed on sunday , law prohibiting alcohol and coffee , law prohibiting doing your washing on Sundays ,polygamy optional ,no birthdays , no family planning, no wearing bright colours or operating modern machines. Only eating fish on fridays , fasting during lent, and speaking in tounges.
    I really dont want to live in that country 😉

  • john spielman

    Dear Sam Seed: all 5 shcools of sharia law agree that apostasy and blasphemy against Islam and Mohammed warrants the death penalty. A “witch” was beheaded in Saudi Arabia this year, and you know repeat homosexual offenders are routinely hanged in Iran. Isn’t it mysogynistic when when a muslim woman’s testimony is worth only half of a muslim man in court not to mention inheritance double standard for men and women? Plus nonmuslims testimony in court carries only half the weight of a muslim and remember the dhimmi status on nonmuslims in a sharia controlled country.
    Dear Geji: the old testament laws seem harsh by our standards but one must remember that the high priest (or Moses in his time) was supposed to speak directly to God to verify the sentence for in the time of Moses GOD met with HIS people in the Tent of Meeting(tabernacle)so there was direct rule by GOD. Later due to sin and rebellion by the people of Israel this did not happen so when Jesus came and said “let him who is without sin cast the first stone”(in response to the woman caught in the act of adultery) He was saying that the Mosaic law had ended. We are now in a time of grace where our sins, if not forgiven by the blood of Jesus’ atoning sacrifice, will be punished at the end of this age when all the dead will arise to face judgment.

  • JT

    “what’s that supposed to mean other than suggesting that the “West” once again is going beyond it’s boundaries”

    That’s exactly what it’s supposed to mean. It wasn’t a criticism of the Quran-only movement or lashings. It’s the truth that even if we go with the Quranic punishment of a hundred lashes, people will still criticise Sharia law and will find that punishment unnaceptable. For people who don’t regard adultery as a crime, any punishment is extreme.

  • Géji

    @ali

    > “Well I’m gonna have to say that stoning is part of Sharia.”

    No, it’s not “part” of Sharia, it’s been added to it. How come something that’s not in line with the Qur’an be part of Islam’s Sharia?. And in less you’re suggesting is perfectly fine that Hadiths have power over Qur’an, or even equal to Qur’an, to enact “Islamic” laws by themselves without being in line with the latter, then you’ll have to admit stoning is not part of Sharia, but something added without the authorization from Qur’an.

    > “Though its better to abolish it in certain countries where its practiced beyond Islamic law.”

    Again, something that was never in line with the Qur’an should’ve never been enacted as “Islamic” law in the first place. So the very practice of it already IS beyond Islamic law.

    > “There’s many reliable hadiths that mention stoning for adultery and rapists.”

    First of all, reliable?

    Reliable definition: True – Safe – Secure – Solid – Steady – Sure – Dependable.

    Which one you’re willing to swear-on that passes the test of those descriptions of reliability, Qur’an or Hadith?

    >”But I’ve been told that the 4 pious witnesses are suppose to remain quiet, and at the time of the Prophet there was intense prostitution and promiscuity.”

    You’re wandering into the lands of fables here. Without any concrete proof of any you’ve “been told” ever happening.

  • Géji

    @john spielman, have you read your Bible? Read the long gray section of the article up-there, it’s actually your Bible speaking.

  • Géji

    @JT says: ” And we can’t fall back on the, “Forget the Hadith, stick with the Quran” argument — 100 lashings isn’t any more appealing to the West.”

    We can’t fall back? more appealing? what’s that supposed to mean other than suggesting that the “West” once again is going beyond it’s boundaries to throw punches that requires something to “fall back” to bring about what’s “appealing” to it’s wishes?? Doesn’t that seem to you typical unjust bulling to belittle?

  • Michael Elwood

    @ali

    “Well I’m gonna have to say that stoning is part of Sharia.”

    I disagree. Stoning is not a part of sharia.

    “Though its better to abolish it in certain countries where its practiced beyond Islamic law.”

    I think it’s better to abolish it in all countries since the practice is itself beyond Islamic Law.

    “There’s many reliable hadiths that mention stoning for adultery and rapists.”

    The “reliable” hadiths that mention stoning for adultery are some of the most ridiculous you’ll ever read. The early Sunni and Shia were clearly troubled by the absence of stoning for adultery in the Quran. And they had no shame fabricating hadiths about goats conveniently eating the verse where stoning adulterers was mentioned and hadiths about monkeys stoning adulterous monkeys. Perhaps the least ridiculous hadith concerning stoning for adultery is the one below:

    ‘Abdullah b. ‘Abbas reported that ‘Umar b. Khattab sat on the pulpit of Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) and said:

    Verily Allah sent Muhammad (may peace be upon him) with truth and He sent down the Book upon him, and the verse of stoning was included in what was sent down to him. We recited it, retained it in our memory and understood it. Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) awarded the punishment of stoning to death (to the married adulterer and adulteress) and, after him, we also awarded the punishment of stoning, I am afraid that with the lapse of time, the people (may forget it) and may say: We do not find the punishment of stoning in the Book of Allah, and thus go astray by abandoning this duty prescribed by Allah. Stoning is a duty laid down in Allah’s Book for married men and women who commit adultery when proof is established, or it there is pregnancy, or a confession.

    Don’t they know that attributing lies to God is a grave offence? The Quran says:

    29:68 Who is more evil than one who fabricates lies and attributes them to God, or denies the truth when it comes to him? Is there not a place in hell for the ingrates? [also see 39:32 and 6:93]

    @JT

    “There really isn’t much proof from the article that this was a “reform” of Sharia Law. It seems more like they decided to get rid of it because of Western pressure and because each case generates too much negative publicity.”

    The article does give the impression that they are more concerned with how “the West” sees them than how God sees them. However, I don’t know if that’s true or not.

    “If that is the case, then this isn’t really useful for Muslims elsewhere and neither is it a lesson about the flexibility of Sharia. Until the actual justifications for the punishment aren’t tackled, no progress has been made. And we can’t fall back on the, “Forget the Hadith, stick with the Quran” argument — 100 lashings isn’t any more appealing to the West. Actually, any punishment for adultery is not acceptable since it’s not even considered a crime. That leaves modem Muslim countries in a bit of a pickle, no?”

    Not surprisingly, this subject has come up before. If you’re interested, you can read an earlier debate about this subject below:

    http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/07/asra-nomani-government-should-tell-muslims-how-to-worship/comment-page-3/#comment-81868

  • Sam Seed

    @john spielman

    Evil? Apartheid? Misogynistic? Witchcraft? Please come back with some evidence for your outragious assertions, you don’t know what Shariah is.

    Shariah is alms giving, fasting, prayer, work, justice, everything that is good for humanity. Don’t be an Islamophobe, think!

    Or see below
    http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/09/sumbul-ali-karamali-whos-afraid-of-shariah/

  • john spielman

    Flexible sharia law is still sharia law, an evil apartheid misogynistic set of punishments that allows multilation of those accused of stealing by amputating hands and feet, executing those who leave Islam for another religion or for “insulting” Mohammed or Islam, or for homosexual behavior, withcraft, or adultery. It codifies inequality before the law for nonmuslims vs muslims, women vs men, in the reliabilty of their testimonies etc. Sharia- flexible or not. results in a terror filled hell on earth.

  • JT

    There really isn’t much proof from the article that this was a “reform” of Sharia Law. It seems more like they decided to get rid of it because of Western pressure and because each case generates too much negative publicity.

    If that is the case, then this isn’t really useful for Muslims elsewhere and neither is it a lesson about the flexibility of Sharia. Until the actual justifications for the punishment aren’t tackled, no progress has been made. And we can’t fall back on the, “Forget the Hadith, stick with the Quran” argument — 100 lashings isn’t any more appealing to the West. Actually, any punishment for adultery is not acceptable since it’s not even considered a crime. That leaves modem Muslim countries in a bit of a pickle, no?

  • mindy1

    Glad this passed, reform is so important

  • ali

    Well I’m gonna have to say that stoning is part of Sharia. Though its better to abolish it in certain countries where its practiced beyond Islamic law. There’s many reliable hadiths that mention stoning for adultery and rapists. In Islamic law adultery can only be prosecuted when there’s 4 reliable pious witnesses (which by the way is almost impossible) who saw the act of adultery take place, but the accused can repent and be pardoned any kind of punishment. But I’ve been told that the 4 pious witnesses are suppose to remain quiet, and at the time of the Prophet there was intense prostitution and promiscuity.

  • WebDawah,

    You wrote,
    ————————————————————————–
    Of course, this is not important enough for the media to mention. It just cut too deep into the anti-Islamic meme that is common in the media. Reporting this goes against the narrative. It’s like celebrating an occurrence that deprives them of material.
    ————————————————————————–

    Yeah, which is why “counter Jihad” blogs will probably never mention this, unless they’re going to claim they’re only pretending to get rid of stoning to fool us.

  • @Ilisha

    This is pretty good news. Stoning is a rather barbaric punishment, even when the guilty party actually committed what should be considered a crime. Hopefully the law in Iran will improve in other areas as well.

  • Of course, this is not important enough for the media to mention. It just cut too deep into the anti-Islamic meme that is common in the media. Reporting this goes against the narrative. It’s like celebrating an occurrence that deprives them of material.

  • Sam Seed

    Stoning in the Bible? surely shome mishtake!But as Jesus (PBUH) said ‘Let who that is without sin cast the first stone’.

Powered by Loon Watchers