Saudi Arabia defends verdict sentencing rape victim to jail, lashes

[jolinar of malkshor]

Saudi Arabia defended on Tuesday a controversial verdict sentencing a 19-year-old gang rape victim to six months jail and 200 lashes.
The e Muslim woman had initially been sentenced to 90 lashes after being convicted of violating Saudi Arabia's rigid Sharia Islamic law on segregation of the sexes.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/...Saudi-Rape.php


We should have zero dealings with governments that support laws like these. Saudi Arabia is one of the worst countries for this crap and we call them allies.

[burn_this_city]

If these guys werent pumping 12% of the worlds oil the west would have cut ties with them ages ago..

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

If these guys werent pumping 12% of the worlds oil the west would have cut ties with them ages ago..

Agreed, but isn't there a point where we need to say enough is enough. We are so happy to get there oil we will look the other way no matter what.


SO are so happy to get the cheap goods from China....who cares about there human rights records. And I am not talking about not letting certain women not wear a long skirt to work.

[4X4]

I think you are overlooking the fact that she broke the law. It is illegal for a married (or unmarried) woman to be rolling around with some guy in S.A.
I agree that it is a stupid law, but it is their law. She broke it and is getting punished. Afterall, Jolinar, you have repeatedly claimed that any law broken is fair game for punishment.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by 4X4

I think you are overlooking the fact that she broke the law. It is illegal for a married (or unmarried) woman to be rolling around with some guy in S.A.
I agree that it is a stupid law, but it is their law. She broke it and is getting punished. Afterall, Jolinar, you have repeatedly claimed that any law broken is fair game for punishment.

I have never supported laws that take the rights of a human being away or laws that make humans equal to a piece of property. I support the laws in democratic nations such as Canada. As you have read in previous posts of mine I dont support some laws such as the death penalty. So your comment isn't really fair.

[SeeGeeWhy]

Hey if you ask me, it sounds like their laws are set up so men can go around doing whatever they want and the women get punished for being there, getting things done to them.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

I have never supported laws that take the rights of a human being away or laws that make humans equal to a piece of property. I support the laws in democratic nations such as Canada. As you have read in previous posts of mine I dont support some laws such as the death penalty. So your comment isn't really fair.

Oh but I think it is. She was not supposed to be cruising around with some guy that was not her husband. It is illegal. That is what she is being punished for. It is not a human right for married women to roll around with random guys. In fact, it is uncool here too. We just don't issue lashes for it.

If your problem is with the lashes, fine. But don't make it sound like she's being punished for getting raped.

Originally Posted by SeeGeeWhy

Hey if you ask me, it sounds like their laws are set up so men can go around doing whatever they want and the women get punished for being there, getting things done to them.

See my comment above.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by 4X4

Oh but I think it is. She was not supposed to be cruising around with some guy that was not her husband. It is illegal. That is what she is being punished for. It is not a human right for married women to roll around with random guys. In fact, it is uncool here too. We just don't issue lashes for it.

OH, ya.....it is uncool to let your wife, girlfriend, daughter, to go out with some friends that are boys. Ok then, not sure what part of Calgary you are living in but I dont want to live there.

This is a human rights issue. These countries treat women like property. By not giving women the right to freedom of movement it is a human right. Just because it is the law doesn't mean it is right. We could make slavery legal, doesnt mean its right. You know damn well.

• Article 13 of the UDHR provides that:
  1. Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.
  2. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

If your problem is with the lashes, fine. But don't make it sound like she's being punished for getting raped.

She is being punished for being raped. In many of these countries if a man rapes a women it is the womens fault for suducing the man.

article 340 of the Jordanian Penal Code. This article stipulates: "He who discovers his wife or one of his female relatives committing adultery (with a man) and kills, wounds or injures one or both of them, is exempt from any penalty." Another clause states: "He who discovers his wife or one of his female relatives with another in an adulterous situation, and kills, wounds or injures one or both of them benefits from a reduction in penalty."

Saudi Arabia is to gender what apartheid South Africa was to race. In public life a woman is almost entirely segregated from men: excluded from the workplace, penned in special "family sections" in restaurants, taught in separate schools and colleges, and forbidden to drive
Under the country's fundamentalist interpretation of Islam, her husband may marry up to four times but an adulterous woman faces death by stoning. Outside the home she must wear the abaya, a black gown which enshrouds her completely, except for a slit for the eyes.

Women are forbidden to drive, to show their head and to speak in public, and to shake a man’s hand. On television, preachers incite husbands to beat their wives “for their own good”

[4X4]

Alright. I read it that she was getting punished for being in the car with the dudes.

To be clear, I don't agree that it is a punishable crime. Just saying that it is their law.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by SeeGeeWhy

Hey if you ask me, it sounds like their laws are set up so men can go around doing whatever they want and the women get punished for being there, getting things done to them.

The men did get punished as well.
I'm not saying it's right, but the woman isn't getting punished for being raped, she is being punished for being with a man who wasn't a family member.

Now it is still an incredibly stupid law, but not understanding why she is being punised and spouting off about how stupid the laws are is a bit ignorant. You're 100% right, but for the wrong reasons.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

The men did get punished as well.
I'm not saying it's right, but the woman isn't getting punished for being raped, she is being punished for being with a man who wasn't a family member.

Now it is still an incredibly stupid law, but not understanding why she is being punised and spouting off about how stupid the laws are is a bit ignorant. You're 100% right, but for the wrong reasons.

I dont have the time to research it now, but in many countries in order for a women to not be tried as an adulturer (sp) and to convict someone of rape, there usually has to be atleast 3 male witnesses that will confirm her story. Otherwise most of the time the female will be tried for adultury and the man will be let off scott free.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

I dont have the time to research it now, but in many countries in order for a women to not be tried as an adulturer (sp) and to convict someone of rape, there usually has to be atleast 3 male witnesses that will confirm her story. Otherwise most of the time the female will be tried for adultury and the man will be let off scott free.

That may be the case, but in this one, the men are being punished, and the woman is being punished for something entirely different.

From the article:
The statement also said that the "charges were proven" against the woman for having been in a car with unrelated male, and repeated criticism of her lawyer for talking "defiantly" about the judicial system, saying "he has shown ignorance."

Either way, it is all backwards, but this is a case of an entirely different, stupid backwards law.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

I dont have the time to research it now, but in many countries in order for a women to not be tried as an adulturer (sp) and to convict someone of rape, there usually has to be atleast 3 male witnesses that will confirm her story. Otherwise most of the time the female will be tried for adultury and the man will be let off scott free.

Well ignorance of the law is no excuse. She shouldn't have been rolling around with a bunch of dudes if the potential punishment is 200 lashes.

Their system is whack, yes, but by their laws, she is not an innocent victim.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

You know, I find it kind of interesting that there is actually debate on this topic.

I think we can all agree that the law that the woman is being punished for is really stupid, but some people are making it out like she is being punished because she was raped.

I think an example of something similar would be if a headline in Canada said: "Hit and Run Victim Given Ticket".
Well what if the victim was speeding at the time?
Clearly they were the victim of a much worse crime, but they were breaking a law and are being punished according to the laws. Kind of like is happening here.

Now that all being said, I'd like to reiterate that I think a woman being punished for being on the street without a relative is ABSOLUTELY STUPID, and should be cause for an uproar, but the fact that she was raped when it happened is I'm sure being used as a way to sensationalize this.
I'm sure women get punished for this same "Crime" a lot more than we hear about, and in this case the fact that she was raped, and the implication that she was punished because of it, is probably raising some awareness of a situation that desperately needs to be changed, but not in a very honest and deliberate way.

Good intentions, but with bad methods. Of course that's an arguement for an entirely different thread.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

That may be the case, but in this one, the men are being punished, and the woman is being punished for something entirely different.

From the article:
The statement also said that the "charges were proven" against the woman for having been in a car with unrelated male, and repeated criticism of her lawyer for talking "defiantly" about the judicial system, saying "he has shown ignorance."

Either way, it is all backwards, but this is a case of an entirely different, stupid backwards law.

In this case I agree, but I could post many more where it is not the case.

[Incinerator]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

You know, I find it kind of interesting that there is actually debate on this topic.

I think we can all agree that the law that the woman is being punished for is really stupid, but some people are making it out like she is being punished because she was raped.

I think an example of something similar would be if a headline in Canada said: "Hit and Run Victim Given Ticket".
Well what if the victim was speeding at the time?
Clearly they were the victim of a much worse crime, but they were breaking a law and are being punished according to the laws. Kind of like is happening here.

Now that all being said, I'd like to reiterate that I think a woman being punished for being on the street without a relative is ABSOLUTELY STUPID, and should be cause for an uproar, but the fact that she was raped when it happened is I'm sure being used as a way to sensationalize this.
I'm sure women get punished for this same "Crime" a lot more than we hear about, and in this case the fact that she was raped, and the implication that she was punished because of it, is probably raising some awareness of a situation that desperately needs to be changed, but not in a very honest and deliberate way.

Good intentions, but with bad methods. Of course that's an arguement for an entirely different thread.

Agreed.

We're all baffled by this absolutely stupid law the Saudis have, and anyone would be in our society. But from their POV, the victim should've known better than to get in the car with the "unrelated male" in the first place, because she KNOWS that this is their law.

It is the law there because this is wrong in their culture, just like it's wrong & illegal to hit your wife here (domestic abuse). Yes, the law is a violation of basic human rights such as freedom of movement and association, but if you are part of that culture where everyone universally accept such values you should adhere to their rules knowing full well what they are. The punishment being too severe for the "crime" notwithstanding.

Obviously they would see some of our laws to be absolutely ridiculous too. Morality is often defined by your society. Technically speaking, there is no absolute universal standards to right or wrong in most things.

[LouCypher]

Law as I see it should protect and serve the public's well being. Laws such as the one in question do nothing to serve public safety. Reading the whole story I am offended though other than rant there is not much that can be done. Right and wrong mean very different things across the world and the most unfortunate part of this is Oil will do the talking before human rights and justice ever get a word in.

[Cowperson]

The victim speaks:

http://abcnews.go.com/International/...3899920&page=1

Cowperson

[simmer2]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

The victim speaks:

http://abcnews.go.com/International/...3899920&page=1

Cowperson

It's really too bad that we have absolutely no leverage against a country like Saudi Arabia because of all of their oil. Acts like this are dispicable.

[octothorp]

While the initial verdict is fairly reprehensible, to me the worst part of the case is that both the woman and her lawyer were punished because they spoke out to the media. It's a decision designed solely to prevent other offenders from speaking out about how injustices in their treatment.

Maybe the UN Human Rights Commission can do something about this. Oh wait, Saudi Arabia is on the human rights commission! How convenient. Well, maybe one of the other member countries there can step up and do something... Sudan? China? Cuba? Pakistan? Zimbabwe?