Outrageous Injustice: Saudi Woman Sentenced to Jail, Lashes

[Evo]

This just burns me up.

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia - The Saudi judiciary on Tuesday defended a court verdict that sentenced a 19-year-old victim of a gang rape to six months in jail and 200 lashes because she was with an unrelated male when they were attacked.

The Shiite Muslim woman had initially been sentenced to 90 lashes after being convicted of violating Saudi Arabia's rigid Islamic law requiring segregation of the sexes.

But in considering her appeal of the verdict, the Saudi General Court increased the punishment.

But the Ministry of Justice stood by the verdict Tuesday, saying that "charges were proven" against the woman for having been in a car with a man who was not her relative.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071121/ap_on_re_mi_ea/saudi_rape

 

[stewartcs]

Barbaric.

 

[turbo]

It's a good thing she wasn't driving the car. They would have doubled her punishment again to 400 lashes.

 

[theCandyman]

The absolute worst. Cutural norms and religion are not anywhere near a good excuse for this kind of judgement. What happened to the men?

 

[waht]

Morality is relative and varies from culture to culture. It's impossible to tolerate something so extreme to us. But if you look at our justice system through a magnifying lens, you will see it's no different.

 

[G01]

Morality is relative and varies from culture to culture. It's impossible to tolerate something so extreme to us. But if you look at our justice system through a magnifying lens, you will see it's no different.

Oh I beg to differ! While our justice system may not be without unfair verdicts, nothing like this would ever come out of a Western Court. Prove me wrong if you can, but I strongly doubt you can find a rape victim being sentenced to prison and corporal punishment anywhere in the western world.

 

[Moridin]

Morality is relative and varies from culture to culture. It's impossible to tolerate something so extreme to us. But if you look at our justice system through a magnifying lens, you will see it's no different.

Where exactly does this happen in that particular justice system? Any form of moral relativism is false if one can establish true moral propositions. One can establish true moral propositions. Therefore, moral relativism is false.

Let's face it: that particular world is living in the dark ages when it comes to justice, partly motivated by primitive religious values.

 

[DaveC426913]

Not that I really want to spark a raging argument, nor am I suggesting that, taken as a whole the scenario was fair or just, but:

Let's hypotheticalize a scenario where a woman is raped while in the midst of breaking, entering and robbing a home. There's no doubt that what happened to her should be punished, but does it mean that her crime of B&E goes unpunished?

This woman did break the law.

Seems to me, the only thing we can react to is whether we consider the law requiring segregation of sexes to be an acceptable law at all. And that's very much a cultural thing.

 

[G01]

Not that I really want to spark a raging argument, nor am I suggesting that, taken as a whole the scenario was fair or just, but:

Let's hypotheticalize a scenario where a woman is raped while in the midst of breaking, entering and robbing a home. There's no doubt that what happened to her should be punished, but does it mean that her crime of B&E goes unpunished?

This woman did break the law.

Seems to me, the only thing we can react to is whether we consider the law requiring segregation of sexes to be an acceptable law at all. And that's very much a cultural thing.

I guess I would like to know what happened to the rapists. Whether the law of segregation is fair or not is up for debate, but I don't think anyone in their right mind would let these rapists go unpunished.

 

[Evo]

But the Ministry of Justice stood by the verdict Tuesday, saying that "charges were proven" against the woman for having been in a car with a man who was not her relative.

The ministry implied the victim's sentence was increased because she spoke out to the press. "For whoever has an objection on verdicts issued, the system allows an appeal without resorting to the media," said the statement, which was carried on the official Saudi Press Agency.

The attack occurred in 2006. The victim says she was in a car with a male student she used to know trying to retrieve a picture of her. She says two men got into the car and drove them to a secluded area where she was raped by seven men. Her friend also was assaulted.

Justice in Saudi Arabia is administered by a system of religious courts according to the kingdom's strict interpretation of Islamic law.

This is wrong, just because it's part of their religion, doesn't make it right.

 

[Moridin]

Provided the action could be legitimately be called a crime. Rape comes with physical and psychological discomfort or more, being in the company of a male does not.

Seems to me, the only thing we can react to is whether we consider the law requiring segregation of sexes to be an acceptable law at all. And that's very much a cultural thing.

Certainly not; it can be objectively demonstrated with scientific inquiry into the damage done etc.

 

[Thrice]

Oh I beg to differ! While our justice system may not be without unfair verdicts, nothing like this would ever come out of a Western Court. Prove me wrong if you can, but I strongly doubt you can find a rape victim being sentenced to prison and corporal punishment anywhere in the western world.

Seems like every other day on digg there's some guy getting tasered to death, some minor getting jailed for taking pictures of herself, Lindsay Lohan getting 84 min in jail (cocaine) while others get 10 years etc. I don't pay too much attention. Sh*t happens.

 

[waht]

Oh I beg to differ! While our justice system may not be without unfair verdicts, nothing like this would ever come out of a Western Court. Prove me wrong if you can, but I strongly doubt you can find a rape victim being sentenced to prison and corporal punishment anywhere in the western world.

Well I didn't mean to imply that in USA you can get away with a rape like that and punish the victim. But our justice system isn't perfect, and people, innocent at that do get screwed.

Where exactly does this happen in that particular justice system? Any form of moral relativism is false if one can establish true moral propositions. One can establish true moral propositions. Therefore, moral relativism is false.

Justice system is also relative from culture to culture, or country to country, or from a system of government to another.

Let's face it: that particular world is living in the dark ages when it comes to justice, partly motivated by primitive religious values.

But their religion is also relative to others. There is no absolute religion, or justice system. Why should yours be any better than other? I'm not trying to defend their actions though.

 

[Evo]

People arent sentenced to flogging in the US.

Women aren't treated like cattle (or worse) in the US.

 

[Moridin]

Seems like every other day on digg there's some guy getting tasered to death, some minor getting jailed for taking pictures of herself, Lindsay Lohan getting 84 min in jail (cocaine) while others get 10 years etc. I don't pay too much attention. Sh*t happens.

Do they get ten years in jail for being next to a person or by committing atrocious acts of murder or worse?

 

[Moridin]

Justice system is also relative from culture to culture, or country to country, or from a system of government to another.

Indeed, but that does not mean that the concept of right and wrong is relative.

But their religion is also relative to others. There is no absolute religion, or justice system. Why should yours be any better than other? I'm not trying to defend their actions though.

No, because science can knock down parts of religion. Justice can be determined objectively . Just because you think something is right does not make it so; just as you can be more correct in physics or history, you can be more correct in ethics.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Morality is relative and varies from culture to culture. It's impossible to tolerate something so extreme to us. But if you look at our justice system through a magnifying lens, you will see it's no different.

Are you comparing the failures of the American justice system to the successes of the Saudi system?

 

[DaveC426913]

This is wrong, just because it's part of their religion, doesn't make it right.

What - explicitly - is wrong? Don't misunderstand me, there's no doubt that there's some wrongdoing happening here, but I think we'd be guilty of a kneejerk reaction if we passed a blanket judgement over the whole incident. More specifically, are you saying the girl did not break the law? Or the law has no business existing? Or if it does, she should be not brought to justice over it?

Provided the action could be legitimately be called a crime. Rape comes with physical and psychological discomfort or more, being in the company of a male does not.

You are now directly questioning the Saudi law itself. Are you claiming that Saudi law has no business making sexual segregation laws at all without your prior approval?

 

[Mallignamius]

I'm going to pass a blanket judgement over the whole incident and say that this is absolutely wrong.

Please pardon my reaction. :)

 

[DaveC426913]

I'm going to pass a blanket judgement over the whole incident and say that this is absolutely wrong.

Please pardon my reaction. :)

Forgive me but this is a pointless claim since, taken at face value, it eliminates ALL law. Presumably, you think it should be should in some way more subtle, more relevant to the issue and more in-keeping with practical needs. So, what part exactly would you un-do?

NB. ... and still have the Saudi people retain their right to a diginified existence to rule themselves.

 

[Mallignamius]

I thought all laws were subjective.

 

[DaveC426913]

Let me take a moment to verbalize my stance:

I am not in any way saying what happened to this girl was not utterly intolerable. Nopr am I saying in way way that these men should not be severely punished.

All I am saying is that: the article is NOT ABOUT the men - I will presume that their case is being dealt with. The article is about this woman who committed a crime. Does everyone believe that Saudi Arabia has no right to impose a law upon its people that forbids the mixing of women with men that they do not know?

 

[Mallignamius]

It seems clear enough to me that the article is about more than that.

 

[DaveC426913]

I thought all laws were subjective.

If that is so then isn't that an excellent reason as to why we have no business judging it?

It seems clear enough to me that the article is about more than that.

What do YOU read into it? (Does it feel like you're walking into a trap? It should.)

 

[Mallignamius]

If that is so then isn't that an excellent reason as to why we have no business judging it?

Being subjective, isn't that also a reason to judge it?

What do YOU read into it? (Does it feel like you're walking into a trap? It should.)

?

 

[DaveC426913]

Being subjective, isn't that also a reason to judge it?

To what end? if it is relevant for them in their culture and not for us in ours, how can we pass any meaningful judgement? And even of we could, what would we do? Overrule them? Invade them?


I'm not suggesting I like the law or how they treat women, I just think that the only way to peace is to respect other cultures, whether or not we understand em. Maybe it comes from watching so much Star Trek...


I believe that the primary reason we war with foreign cultures is that deep-down, we do not treat their cultures with the respect we demand for our own.

?

You're reading your own issues into the article. That's what makes a "good" article get talked about. What I'm trying to do is tease out from the mish-mash of outraged emotions what, exactly, is unjust here - and what is not.

I'm trying to root out the potential for hypocrasy - where we may pass judgement on things that, if applied to us, in our personal experience, we would see differently. Would you demand that, if you were caught robbing a house and were nearly killed, that you should not be punished for robbing the house?

 

[Mallignamius]

To what end? if it is relevant for them in their culture and not for us in ours, how can we pass any meaningful judgement? And even of we could, what would we do? Overrule them? Invade them?

I'm not suggesting I like the law or how they treat women, I just think that the only way to peace is to respect other cultures, whether or not we understand em. Maybe it comes from watching so much Star Trek...

I believe that the primary reason we war with foreign cultures is that deep-down, we do not treat their cultures with the respect we demand for our own.

Why couldn't I apply the same argument of yours to a more personal, neighborly situation? Why is "a different culture" where the buck don't go?

You're reading your own issues into the article. That's what makes a "good" article get talked about. What I'm trying to do is tease out from the mish-mash of outraged emotions what, exactly, is unjust here - and what is not.

I'm trying to root out the potential for hypocrasy - where we may pass judgement on things that, if applied to us, in our personal experience, we would see differently. Would you demand that, if you were caught robbing a house and were nearly killed, that you should not be punished for robbing the house?

Someway, somehow, I believe there is a better way in life. And I believe that without judging the conduct of other cultures, peoples, or individuals, we'll never figure out what that may be.

Let's go further out and put a witch trial into the argument. Should we let a young girl be burned at the stake, for the sake of respecting that society's ideas?

 

[EnumaElish]

For starters, and as separate counts, whereby terms such as "but," "or," "and" are meant not as exclusions but are meant as inclusions, I'd undo first and foremost and as a key element, the inequality of the sexes before the law; unrestrained or excessive or vindictive or inhuman interpretation, implementation and application of the existing law; any higher court's ability to micro-manage lower court decisions (insofar as the higher court interferes with specific selective aspects of the lower court decision rather than upholding vs. overturning it in its entirety); to the extent present, the practice of Ministry of Justice's appointment of judges and its interference with court decisions; and all punishment conflicting with my (personal) principle of "no cruel and unusual punishment."

I think I could come up with 10 or 20 additional counts, but that would take more time and thought.

 

[DaveC426913]

Let's go further out and put a witch trial into the argument. Should we let a young girl be burned at the stake, for the sake of respecting that society's ideas?

Was burning at the stake a government sanctioned law or was it mob rule?



Of note: burning at the stake is WAY overrated. No witches at the Salem Witch trials were burned at the stake and rarely anywhere else either. Mostly they were hanged.

Sometimes what we think are reliable facts we can use as precedents, aren't so much.

 

[DaveC426913]

Someway, somehow, I believe there is a better way in life. And I believe that without judging the conduct of other cultures, peoples, or individuals, we'll never figure out what that may be.

Was this a Freudian slip or do you really believe that it is "we" who do the judging, and it is "other cultures" that are judged?

See how slippery this slope is? Oh sure, after-the fact, that can say you "didn't really mean it that way"... What would you have gone on to do if no one had pointed out the error?

 

[Mallignamius]

Witch burning is a bad example. But it still suits the point I'm making. I think it's safe to say that there is a right and wrong way of implementing justice. And I have every right to judge the way justice is being carried out. I resort to blanket judgments like this when even on the surface it's clearly wrong. But that's only according to me, of course.

And a few others here, too.

 

[Mallignamius]

Was this a Freudian slip or do you really believe that it is "we" who do the judging, and it is "other cultures" that are judged?

It's very easy to say, after-the fact, that you "didn't really mean it that way", isn't it?

Eh? I don't understand what you mean by this.

 

[DaveC426913]

Witch burning is a bad example. But it still suits the point I'm making. I think it's safe to say that there is a right and wrong way of implementing justice.

Really? How can that be true and it be subjective at the same time?

 

[DaveC426913]

Eh? I don't understand what you mean by this.

Reread your post. You said we will do the "judging" and other cultures will do the "being judged".

As I said in post 26:

...deep-down, we do not treat other cultures with the respect we demand for our own.

 

[Evo]

Dave, I noticed you conveniently bypassed my post.

People arent sentenced to flogging in the US.

Women aren't treated like cattle (or worse) in the US.

It also looks like you've forgotten this is the 21st century since you keep referring to how things were done 400-500 years ago.