This just burns me up.
It's a good thing she wasn't driving the car. They would have doubled her punishment again to 400 lashes.
The absolute worst. Cutural norms and religion are not anywhere near a good excuse for this kind of judgement. What happened to the men?
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.
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.
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.
This is wrong, just because it's part of their religion, doesn't make it right.
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.
Certainly not; it can be objectively demonstrated with scientific inquiry into the damage done etc.
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.
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.
Justice system is also relative from culture to culture, or country to country, or from a system of government to another.
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.
People arent sentenced to flogging in the US.
Women aren't treated like cattle (or worse) in the US.
Do they get ten years in jail for being next to a person or by committing atrocious acts of murder or worse?
Indeed, but that does not mean that the concept of right and wrong is relative.
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.
Are you comparing the failures of the American justice system to the successes of the Saudi system?
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?
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?
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.
I thought all laws were subjective.
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?
It seems clear enough to me that the article is about more than that.
If that is so then isn't that an excellent reason as to why we have no business judging it?
What do YOU read into it? (Does it feel like you're walking into a trap? It should.)
Being subjective, isn't that also a reason to judge it?
Separate names with a comma.