The evidentiary bar that the shari’ah has for adultery is so high that it cannot possibly be met unless people voluntarily confess, or deliberately go out of their way to be publicly seen in the act. Four male witnesses of upright character (and no criminal record) must testify under oath that they actually witnessed penetration (which is difficult to actually see). If the witnesses were willingly and deliberately watching (!) they are no longer upright. Film evidence is not permissible as proof because this can be forged.
Even after a confession an adulterer can withdraw their confession and avoid the penalty even if it has already started. This is not a result of un-Islamic legal obfuscation by merciful judges, it is actually the sunnah of the Prophet who repeatedly turned away or tried to deflect people who wanted to confess their sin.
The Prophet said:
Ward off capital and corporal punishment (hadd) as much as you can…
(Tirmidhi; Hakim et al)
Ward off punishments through ambiguities…
(Sunan al-Bayhaqi)
I have loosely paraphrased this from A Thinking Person’s Guide to Islam pps 144-147
It also helps to note that under a Shari’ah society, there would be preventative measures in place that would naturally deter people from engaging in such capital crimes. Prevention is always better than trying to find or implement a cure when a sinful act has already become rampant in society.
ph3
Can you give examples of such preventative measures?
Thanks
This is one of the glories of sharia the western world could benefit from.. over to you ph3
1. Lowering the gaze to avoid lustful thoughts and intentions.
2. Limiting the free-mixing (unnecessary talking, physical contact, etc) of males and females, especially in school and work settings.
3. Clothing yourself properly.
4. A collectivist society that maintains a system of checks and balances against adultery.
5. Outright banning of degeneracy
wtf in 2020
Er whatever
U historical Fairy tales: wtf in 2020
I agree. By now, you’d think Muslims would catch up with the rest of the world by slavishly following the ever-changing whims of white leftists/liberals.
ph3
Thanks for your examples.
I note that you wrote “under a Shari’ah society, there would be preventative measures”, does this mean that there are no such societies in the world? (if there are, you would have written “there are…”). If this is the case, how are we (*the “western world” as Paul puts it) to evaluate whether such a scheme for social control would be suitable and achievable?
In England we have tried similar schemes in the past, in particular during the Protectorate when Puritanism was dominant. This didn’t last long and was replaced by a period of licentiousness in the form of the Restoration. So the cultural pendulum swings back and forth. It would be nice if we could settle on norms that balance individual autonomy with collective interests.
In principle I would like to see a return to socially conservative values which, in my country of England surely would include a resurgence of the Christian Church and a strong assertion of English and European identity. The alternative, given the mass migration occurring in Europe now is a future of social fragmentation, decline of the indigenous cultures and conflict. I look with interest at the policies of our Eastern European friends in Hungary and Poland who are consciously enacting policies to preserve and defend their cultures.
So, I applaud pro family policies and behaviors but am skeptical about some of the examples you give as applicable to England. (e.g. 1 and 2 are deeply rooted behavior -hard to see how these could change except by organic social evolution over time)
I appreciate your sentiments Andy. However I see a problem: you call for a resurgence of the Christian Church yet you yourself do not believe in the fundamentals of Christianity. How can you advocate what you do not believe in?
Paul,
Good point! In a previous post I quoted Cardinal Ratzinger “Even one who does not succeed in finding the way of accepting God, should, nevertheless, seek to live and to direct his life veluti si Deus daretur, as if God existed”
This comes from a lecture with which I find myself in agreement and most sympathetic to the ideas expressed:
https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/culture/catholic-contributions/cardinal-ratzinger-on-europe-s-crisis-of-culture.html
I’ve spent most of my life as an atheist and/or agnostic with a default hostility or antipathy towards religion. It’s only in the last couple of years this has diminished – I guess my Sensus divinitatis is rather weak.
yep evolving and adapting is necessary or you become obsolete as islamic fundamentalism is already.
Fairy tales: yep evolving and adapting is necessary or you become obsolete as islamic fundamentalism is already.
In other words, if you ain’t white, your values ain’t right.
Andy Riley: In England we have tried similar schemes in the past, in particular during the Protectorate when Puritanism was dominant. This didn’t last long and was replaced by a period of licentiousness in the form of the Restoration.
Therein lies the problem. Top-down regulations need to be balanced with bottom-up changes.
Kmak, he/she/it/they/apace helicopter (gotta use pronouns cause its 2020 and I am woke af!!!) really needs their daily dose of pr0n and some thuggin of the little one. Consuming that stuff does wonders for the brain, ya know?
Andy Riley: I note that you wrote “under a Shari’ah society, there would be preventative measures”, does this mean that there are no such societies in the world?
Thank you for the response. I should have clarified that by “Shari’ah society”, I meant a society that strives to implement God’s teachings and morality that will elevate people from their tribalism, materialism, and wrongdoings. Since human beings are imperfect in their nature, no past, present, or future society is perfect (even in the times of the prophets and messengers, there was no Utopia of believers and companions).
Andy Riley: In England we have tried similar schemes in the past, in particular during the Protectorate when Puritanism was dominant. This didn’t last long and was replaced by a period of licentiousness in the form of the Restoration. So the cultural pendulum swings back and forth. It would be nice if we could settle on norms that balance individual autonomy with collective interests.
Similarly, in the US, we tried Prohibition. A lot of people say that it was ineffective, due to the obvious black market importation of alcohol products. However, what do they ignore is that society really collectively benefited as a whole.
Andy Riley: So the cultural pendulum swings back and forth. It would be nice if we could settle on norms that balance individual autonomy with collective interests.
I have noticed that the cultural pendulum is much more a thing the West than the rest of the world. The Western world’s historical narrative is based on development and progress, in which historical change is much more significant and focused on the present rather than the past.
Andy Riley: In principle I would like to see a return to socially conservative values which, in my country of England surely would include a resurgence of the Christian Church and a strong assertion of English and European identity. The alternative, given the mass migration occurring in Europe now is a future of social fragmentation, decline of the indigenous cultures and conflict. I look with interest at the policies of our Eastern European friends in Hungary and Poland who are consciously enacting policies to preserve and defend their cultures.
Return to being socially and fiscally conservative and preserve your culture, as God as created all of us with different tongues and colors so that we will get to know one another. The “European identity” you speak of is quite a stretch and not genuine, considering the vast differences present in the people and cultures. The “mass migration” is unfortunately a symptom of your country’s and neighboring ones imperialistic policies in the past, where nations were carved from thin air, societies pillaged, resources and wealth stolen and taken all into the motherlands. It’s really easy to sit back with food on the table, reap the benefits of your ancestors, and complain about “mass migration”. Please return to such values, and destroy your interest- based banking, foreign direct interventions and black operations, and the UN. Hungary and Poland are doing a good job with promoting traditional families and procreation and also having movements against communism, fascism, and LGBT alphabet soup.
Andy Riley: So, I applaud pro family policies and behaviors but am skeptical about some of the examples you give as applicable to England. (e.g. 1 and 2 are deeply rooted behavior -hard to see how these could change except by organic social evolution over time)
(1) is not a societal behavior; it’s rooted in an individual striving to avoid lust. All it means is not looking at others with lust.
(2) Will change for the better through the organic social evolution as you described.