[Merged] Human Rights In Nigeria

[anhedonia]

Yes, well, I guessed it was probably that kind of a situation. You know, this reminds me of the court case in To Kill A Mockingbird - he is obviously innocent, but because he is black, he is charged as being guilty, anyway... I had hoped, in the year 2002, humans were at least intelligent enough to be rid of such ridiculous prejudice. We can go to the moon, but we can't accept somebody who is different superficially.

 

[conkermaniac]

Originally posted by Jan

This is the 2002....not the dim dark ages

First of all, Jan, you need to realize that the Bible was written before the Dark Ages. Almost all of the faiths popular today were all started BEFORE the Dark Ages. This in includes Christianity (birth of Jesus), Judaism, Islam (Prophet Mohammed, I think 622 AD), indigenous, Buddhism (Siddartha, c. 6 BC), Hindu, etc.

Secondly, this is the Bible. If you are not Christian, then you have absolutely no reason responding to my post at all since you cannot connect with such a feeling. Christians are supposed to follow the Bible 100%, and if it says that all homosexuals and adults committing adultery should be stoned to death, then it must be so.

Webdude, Christianity does allow for forgiveness, but I'm just pointing out that God would even support such a punishment for sinners. However, I do agree that if the religious zealots actually paid more attention to the Qu'ran more than their power, than a death sentence wouldn't have been in order in the first place.

 

[Jan]

Since the return of civilian government in 1999, the mainly Muslim communities of the North have begun reintroducing Sharia, in part as a response to perceived rise in lawlessness.

The law code has not been welcomed by the North's Christian minority, however, and in past years its application had triggered bloody riots that left hundreds dead.

 

[anhedonia]

Religion is no excuse to stone someone to death. We're talking about stoning here. Not a lethal injection, or a hanging, but a stoning. What if the woman seeks forgiveness? Will she be granted it by the court? Of course not. But if it was up to God to forgive her, He would. Are the accusers and the executioners so pure, so holy? Have they never sinned?

Okay, sure, give her a (short) jail sentence, or make her pay some kind of a fine, or do community service, or something that is at least humane. We are a hundred times worse than those we condemn in these situations.

 

[conkermaniac]

Originally posted by Jan

You just don't get it at all, do you? The point I'm making is that Christians shouldn't be questioning the humanity of something that their own religion encourages to perform towards those who are unrepentant sinners. What you just pointed out has nothing to do with the topic.

I agree with your post, anhedonia. It is inhumane. The executioners are clearly not following the word of Allah/God. He would forgive; He is merciful. Even though the woman may have asked for forgiveness in private, I don't think it is our right to say that a lighter punishment should have been rewarded because the Bible itself recommends "death by stoning". What I would like to see is the woman ask Allah for forgiveness in a mosque in front of everyone. The Qu'ran would say that the woman should be forgiven in this instance, and the prosecutors couldn't get past that without making it look like they are disobeying Allah.

 

[anhedonia]

You know, it really sickens me that religion is such a corrupt thing. I believe in God, but do not commit myself to being a Christian or a Catholic or anything like that. Sometimes it seems as though those acting on their religious beliefs are those who do the very worst.

 

[Jan]

Originally posted by conkermaniac
You just don't get it at all, do you? The point I'm making is that Christians shouldn't be questioning the humanity of something that their own religion encourages to perform towards those who are unrepentant sinners. What you just pointed out has nothing to do with the topic.

It was a quote from the URL in anhedonia's first post, so had a lot to do with the topic :angry2:

My last post in this thread

 

[anhedonia]

Oh, come on, guys, I was just thinking how good it was that now we can talk about a serious, controversial issue without an argument breaking out.

 

[conkermaniac]

Originally posted by anhedonia
You know, it really sickens me that religion is such a corrupt thing. I believe in God, but do not commit myself to being a Christian or a Catholic or anything like that. Sometimes it seems as though those acting on their religious beliefs are those who do the very worst.

I agree. I love God, but I don't like Christianity so much anymore.

 

[The Red Guy]

I shld think it'll continue as long as they practice their religions. We shldn't speak too much of their traditions anyway.

 

[Johnny]

Originally posted by conkermaniac


I agree. I love God, but I don't like Christianity so much anymore.

so what religion are you?
cause all religion has god, or gods. Could anyone tell me if juvoava withness, I know i spell it wrong. but you know those poeple who come to your house early in the morning and ask you to join there religion, what religion are they from?

 

[Toefur]

Originally posted by Johnny


so what religion are you?
cause all religion has god, or gods. Could anyone tell me if juvoava withness, I know i spell it wrong. but you know those poeple who come to your house early in the morning and ask you to join there religion, what religion are they from?

Jehovah's are a Christian sect.

Also, not all religions have a god/gods.

 

[Todd]

Originally posted by Johnny
"Go back to my jaywalking comment, if you know the punishment is death and do it anyway for whatever reason it still doesn't justify the punishment.

how is that not justify the punishment? you know the laws and you broke it. its a matter of it being cruel and unusual. and compromising is the wishes of the district attorney.

It's not just a matter of stoning being cruel and unusual punishment but it's more about the crime having a reasonable punishment. If you murder someone the death penalty is more reasonable as it fits the crime. In this case she didn't kill anyone and yet she is being killed. The punishment is far too severe for the crime.

Just because a law is passed doesn't necessarily mean it's right. If a law was passed saying anyone who has used the name Johnny should be killed would that make it right? Of course not, laws must be reasonable and the punishment must be justified. Who decides if a law is right or not? It's not actually the politicians but rather the public and the Judges. If such a law existed any judge with some morality would ignore it and most likely find you not guilty. We have an appeals court system in the USA where wrongs can be taken to the Supreme Court and they will provide the common sense answer.

Point being is the punishment is far too severe for the crime. Religious issues really don't apply, as long as you have morals you should be able to realize this punishment is far to severe.

 

[Webdude]

Originally posted by Todd

It's not just a matter of stoning being cruel and unusual punishment but it's more about the crime having a reasonable punishment. If you murder someone the death penalty is more reasonable as it fits the crime. In this case she didn't kill anyone and yet she is being killed. The punishment is far too severe for the crime.

So Todd. you are saying that God is wrong?

 

[DanielP]

Actually webdude, all writings are flawed, and are not, never were and never will be the whole truth. Any "holy book" be it the Bible, Koran (spelling?) etc... these were all written by MAN. we know how flawed MAN is and how man changes things and doesn't quite remember things word for word... so to say that some silly stuff written in a book is the true "will" of god is about as full of horse **** as clinton was when he said he didn't have relations with his intern

 

[Webdude]

I was joking with Todd. I am definietely against stoning, even if it is in the Bible. Back then, they didnt have the more humane forms of discipline that we do now. I would think that any religion would allow for the more humane method.

Besides, there is a particular verse said by Jesus in the Bible when some people were going to stone a prostitute to death.

"Let he without sin cast the first stone."

That single phrase, at least on the Christianity side of things, answers the question as to whether this act should be carried out or not. I think the phrase is just as accurate today as the day he said it.

 

[conkermaniac]

Originally posted by Johnny


so what religion are you?
cause all religion has god, or gods. Could anyone tell me if juvoava withness, I know i spell it wrong. but you know those poeple who come to your house early in the morning and ask you to join there religion, what religion are they from?

Who's the "God" in Buddhism? Certainly not the Buddha.

You don't have to follow a religion to love God.

 

[anhedonia]

Originally posted by Webdude
Besides, there is a particular verse said by Jesus in the Bible when some people were going to stone a prostitute to death.

"Let he without sin cast the first stone."

That single phrase, at least on the Christianity side of things, answers the question as to whether this act should be carried out or not. I think the phrase is just as accurate today as the day he said it.

I think I said something like that somewhere in this thread. Brilliant quote, Webdude. It's true - the executioners should be allowed to do this only if they are holy, and completely clean of sin. The lawyers presenting this case should quote this - how can it be argued with?

 

[DanielP]

Its easy to argue against that in a court of law in America, while there are references to god in some things, there is a seperation of church and state, so you can't go arguing that its against so and so religion to execute someone or else you'd loose the case.

 

[Webdude]

Originally posted by DanielP
there is a seperation of church and state, so you can't go arguing that its against so and so religion to execute someone or else you'd loose the case.

Is there? Before the Supreme Court goes into sessions, they pray. Courts have you swear on the Holy Bible. On all court plates, and even our money....all say "In God we Trust". Things in the Bible are considered legal and admissable in court. They would have to be, since you put your hand on the very same book and "swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth".

Separation of Church and State does not mean the Government and Law cannot believe in a certain religion. The U.S. is Founded in Christianity. The separation you speak of however does exist as in our Government cannot force Christianity onto anyone, not discriminate or make things difficult on another religion.

As far as Nigeria, do they recognize the New Testament as part of the Bible? If not, then it is useless to use quotes from the New Testament on them...