Conviction and punishment for adultery/fornication in Islam.

[Kirran]

An unmarried couple is perfectly capable of protecting "dignity, children, inheritance, and legacies." I know many unmarried couples, some with kids, who do a fine and honourable job in this regard.

My parents included!

They're holding out for the extension of civil partnerships to different-sex couples

 

[Smart_Guy]

That is what perhaps happened in the case of Maria al-Qibtiyya. Therefore, Allah allowed Mohammad to have sex before the completion of his vow.

She was part of Mulk Alyameen, which is a completely different study on its own than the one at hand. She lived with him as his official wife as they got along with it and they had a child who's approved as a child of the Prophet by all Muslims. She's also one of the mothers of the believers. In other beliefs thru history such case left the woman just an object. That's another story for another place anyway. This section is not for debate and all I did was clarifying. The thread is meant for education and comparison and at this point it cannot afford more off-topics than there already are.

Adultery or insemination by a person chosen by the husband or the family occurred in mythology. The progeny of such union was given full rights of inheritance. One female suspect was turned to stone for adultery. In the middle ages, such 'fallen' women (or men) would be ostracized by the society and put in a fifth and lowest caste - Candala.

In what belief is this?

And thank you for sharing.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Here's my position:

- there's absolutely nothing wrong with premarital sex. It's outrageous to even consider making "fornication" a crime (though you aren't the first to do so).

- adultery is a matter between the two spouses... and nobody else. It isn't your business to make it a criminal offense.

- corporal punishment, including lashes, is abhorrent. It's evil. It's completely inappropriate for ANY crime.

I don't care if you have iron-clad proof that somebody "fornicated". My problem with what you're suggesting has nothing to do with evidence. My problem with what you're suggesting is that fornication shouldn't be a crime at all.

I know how you're defining fornication. It shouldn't be a crime.

Seems to me like this got covered earlier in other posts, but thank you for elaborating you opinion.

 

[Smart_Guy]

I want to point out that the proper boundaries of sexual morality can and must change significantly depending on other parameters of a given society.

To the best of my understanding, historically there has been a lot of concern regarding rights of inheritance. The chances of survival and of material confort of any given person had a lot to do with whether that person had been acknowledged as the lawful inheritor of the wealth of someone else. To this day, a major reason for marriage to exist at all is to establish financial commitment between the spouses and, to a slightly lesser degree, a responsibility of the spouse's families towards the other spouse's well being.

That is why provisions for allowing men to marry the widows of their own brothers, which sound so odd today, are so recurrent in the Abrahamic religions. There was a very significant practical result of those. Those societies did not really have much of a reason to even state that men are supposed to earn the material means for sustaining their own wives and children, while the wives are expected to seek a honorable man that chooses to provide for them and their offspring.

That was simply how things worked back then; people could not reasonably be expected to feel any significant drive to put their hard effort into seeking the means for safety and economic safety for those not of their own family.

In such an environment, it was very much necessary to take steps to assure that people had some certainty of who their parents and children were; that their wives did not have intercourse with other men; that their men were capable and willing of providing material means for their wives and children. And, significantly, that adultery was perceived (fairly) as not too different from continued stealing of other people's honor and material rights.

It is an entirely different situation when a society is willing to accept that women can earn their own livings and some sort of provision must be made for men that are actually unable or unwilling to provide proper material support for their own children and wives. All the more so when effective birth control is also available, and there are various ways of people for earning material safety without it necessarily coming from their own biological or adoptive parents.

The priorities and even actual needs jump all over the place, and not all of the results are reassuring. There is a lot more freedom, but also a lot more complexity and uncertainty.

Still, it means that fornication loses so much of its drawbacks that t may easily become a good thing overall, and adultery becomes a very lesser concern, or even no concern at all if a proper understanding and structure are in place for a given specific couple.

To a degree I sympathise with the concerns that I think I see in many Muslims, particularly those that do live in patriarcal societies similar to those of the time of the Abrahamic scriptures. Besides the plain fact that their expectations make sense for the parameters that they know and expect to live under, there is also the real and often neglected concern of what to do with those who fall under the cracks of all those complex and varied situations.

I know how troubled I feel when I realize that certain people are actually allowed to raise children despite what to me looks like complete, even criminal lack of proper means (not always financial means at that). There is a considerable degree of voluntary delusion and negligence in what passes for consideration for the future of our society. I have seen children be raised into parameters that, to me, look all the world like they were designed to purposefully make delinquents and social parasites out of them.

Still, those challenges must be faced in ways other than just longing for simpler, more predictable times.

Good read.

Honestly, it really hurts me seeing social problems clearly caused, either directly or indirectly, by different uncontrolled/non-moderated sexual desires done whenever wanted. Just the other day I heard a story of the concerned person themselves told by them, themselves (not reported or part of the media). They were left alone as new born baby to a very young mother and had their lives full of difficulties. You have no idea how bad I felt for it and I wished I could see them in real life, hug them tight and apologize to them for something I didn't even do.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Honestly, it really hurts me seeing social problems clearly caused, either directly or indirectly, by different uncontrolled/non-moderated sexual desires done whenever wanted.

Are they greater or less than the social problems caused by the desire by one person to have other people tortured if they don't abide by his religious beliefs?

 

[Smart_Guy]

Any comments on the difference between Qu'ranic Sharia law and Sharia law in modern practice, for this topic?

A British tourist was raped by two men in UAE recently. She went straight to the police. They arrested her for committing adultery. She's in prison, still, as far as I know.

This is irrelevant to the topic (off-topic and against the section rules, I believe), but out of respect, I'd gladly respond to you.

She's been released already. It was part of the investigation that revealed that the act was done with the consent of the three whom were all freed to return to their countries (or continue whatever they were doing there perhaps). Charges were all dropped. But I feel you and don't disagree with you. She shouldn't have been taken in. I wish they didn't take her in.

Also, three British people get themselves involved in such a feud in a foreign country in acts in violation of the country rules? Dude, why don't they do their own mess in their own country. and let their country deal the that mess when it is reported? When they entered the country, they agreed to follow the rules. In UAE, it is not allowed for a woman to stay in a closed private place with a non relative. Rules are rules. Yet they broke it and the charges were all dropped later.

But anyway, this is off-topic. You are welcome to comment in-topic, or you're welcome to start another thread about this one in the appropriate section.

 

[Kirran]

Out of curiosity, given the degree of your respect for the rule of law @Smart_Guy, in what ways do you think citizens should react to a law which they find to be unjust?

 

[Smart_Guy]

That certainly simplifies a brutal and ugly form of punishment that's really just there to control a people. In truth, it's not a deterrent, it's just a power play to keep people enslaved in their own private lives. It's a bit too "North Korea" for me.

Regardless to the choice of words here, thank you for sharing your opinion.

 

[Smart_Guy]

An unmarried couple is perfectly capable of protecting "dignity, children, inheritance, and legacies." I know many unmarried couples, some with kids, who do a fine and honourable job in this regard.

If, in your culture, there's no way for people in this position to protect these things, then the problem is with your culture and its rules, not with those people.

This was referred to in previous posts too.

Even if you say that, facts are facts. Facts clearly show that way too many of those thought to be perfectly capable of protecting what's mentioned, turned out as cause of misfortune and chaos.

It is the same in my culture, in the capability department, but our problems don't compare to the problem in other cultures. I talked about this before.

 

[Kirran]

It is the same in my culture, in the capability department, but our problems don't compare to the problem in other cultures. I talked about this before.

I am interested in how you see this to be case - do you mean regarding some of specific issues you have raised in this thread, or more generally?

 

[Smart_Guy]

Are they greater or less than the social problems caused by the desire by one person to have other people tortured if they don't abide by his religious beliefs?

Problems are everywhere and we are talking about specific problems related to a specific subject here. But as an answer I say that it's a wrong question. There is no desire to have anyone tortured, and I talked about this before.

But this thread is not a debate thread. Please remember that. Let's keep it as it should be, a comparative religions thread.

 

[Kirran]

Hmm, this is kinda complicated for my countable number of my brain cells.

It's off-topic topic tho and the thread got derailed enough.

I'd gladly participate in it if it is in the right place here on RF. Gotta admit tho, it's kinda annoying

I guess I thought it was related enough to the OP to be OK, but if you'd prefer to not discuss it here that's cool, sorry if it bothered you.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Out of curiosity, given the degree of your respect for the rule of law @Smart_Guy, in what ways do you think citizens should react to a law which they find to be unjust?

Hmm, this is kinda complicated for my countable number of my brain cells.

It's off-topic topic tho and the thread got derailed enough.

I'd gladly participate in it if it is in the right place here on RF. Gotta admit tho, it's kinda annoying

I am interested in how you see this to be case - do you mean regarding some of specific issues you have raised in this thread, or more generally?

Ditto... kinda...

But out of respect to you, I specifically meant that for the related issues in this thread. But to my observation, I do find that social matters related to family here are stable and safe. There are problems, of course, but by all means they don't qualify as commonly observed classifications.

 

[Smart_Guy]

I guess I thought it was related enough to the OP to be OK, but if you'd prefer to not discuss it here that's cool, sorry if it bothered you.

We have a saying here that means "being hit by those you like, feels good". You didn't bother me in the least. I just wanted, from the beginning, to have this thread as a comparative religions thread. Thank you for your understanding.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Gosh, I raised a very controversial, stressful and discomforting topic, didn't I

 

[LuisDantas]

Gosh, I raised a very controversial, stressful and discomforting topic, didn't I

The subject matter is perhaps inherently somewhat controversial. But speaking for myself, I kind of like to discuss it.

 

[YmirGF]

Yes, that's one view shared by different people as well. People differ in their views and beliefs so it is a clear part of the Islamic education that "to you your religion (any kinda belief system) and to you my own" and also that humanity is created in many different people (different in everything) so they can get antiquated to know each others different cultures, traditions, etc.

And thanks man!

In all honesty, I made a mistake in the beginning not including a part explaining the point of view of Islam forbidding adultery, something I had to go thru within further posts as members brought it up to my attention. Punishments aren't there for revenge or horrifying people in the first place. I'll see if editing is still allowed to do it.

Trust me, I understand. I'll be perfectly blunt. What originally swayed me against Islamic thought was the juvenile attitudes towards sexuality, resulting lack of understanding of the human condition, and the oppression such attitudes promote. While so-called "western" understanding is far from perfect at least it has the decency not to claim to be perfect or originating in the confused mind of an unsatisfied god.

 

[YmirGF]

Gosh, I raised a very controversial, stressful and discomforting topic, didn't I

Controversial perhaps, but quite far from stressful and discomforting to me. Far, far from it... ... you will have to try much harder to get under my skin, LOL.

 

[LuisDantas]

An unmarried couple is perfectly capable of protecting "dignity, children, inheritance, and legacies." I know many unmarried couples, some with kids, who do a fine and honourable job in this regard.

If, in your culture, there's no way for people in this position to protect these things, then the problem is with your culture and its rules, not with those people.

To be fair, a big part of having that ability comes from being in a social environment that knows how to accept and respect those couples.

Here in Brazil, as recently as in 1975 there was such a powerful stigma against legally separated women that other children were ordered not to play with theirs. It mattered not if the husband left wife and children on their own to go live with some other woman.

Having the means for protecting children in any society is not an inherent power, but rather the result of the cooperation of many people and circunstances.

 

[David1967]

Gosh, I raised a very controversial, stressful and discomforting topic, didn't I

Told you! But very relevant and informative regardless.