Mother to be stoned to death in Iran

UPDATE:  Iran halted death by stoning for Ashtiani.  However she could still face the death penalty.  Please take action to stop the execution.

On June 30, Amnesty  reported that Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, an Iranian mother of two, could be stoned to death at any moment.

Her crime?  Adultery.

While extreme cases of adultery in the US turn into tabloid fodder, Iran’s penal code prescribes execution by stoning as the penalty for adultery by married persons.

Ashtiani was convicted after confessing in 2006.  Human rights lawyer, Mohammad Mostafaei, however, said Thursday that her confession was coerced; Ashtiani only confessed after suffering 99 lashes.  And though Ashtiani has since retracted her confession, Iran’s supreme court upheld the conviction in 2007.

Amnesty International reported in 2008 that the majority of those sentenced to death by stoning are women.

Mina Ahadi, head of the International Committee Against Stoning and the Death Penalty, believes that pressure from groups like Amnesty International is the only likely way to save Ashtiani.

On Wednesday, Amnesty International made a new call to the Iranian government to immediately halt all executions and put a halt on all death sentences.  According to Amnesty, Iran has issued 126 executions so far in 2010.

In 2007, in reaction to another stoning case in Iran, Amnesty International UK Director, Kate Allen, said, “To execute anyone by stoning is barbaric and disgraceful; to execute a woman for adultery in this cruel way simply beggars belief… Iran should abolish the sentence of stoning once and for all.

Of course, Amnesty International opposes the death penalty in all cases.  Execution by stoning, however, is particularly cruel, because according to Iranian penal code, it is specifically designed to increase the victim’s suffering since the stones are deliberately chosen to be large enough to cause pain, but not so large as to kill the victim immediately.

AIUSA welcomes a lively and courteous discussion that follow our Community Guidelines. Comments are not pre-screened before they post but AIUSA reserves the right to remove any comments violating our guidelines.

72 thoughts on “Mother to be stoned to death in Iran

  1. Please spare this woman's life. These methods are Draconian.

  2. Please spare this woman’s life. These methods are Draconian.

  3. And Iran wonders why the rest of the world doesn't include them in decision making…

  4. And Iran wonders why the rest of the world doesn’t include them in decision making…

  5. Dear Cindy,

    "The world" is more than we make it .

    If "world" is just shorthand for the "West", as the media conditions us to think.

    The West's ( US / EU / israel's ) motivated & spiralling campaign against Iran fools no one.

    But, you see, it ( the West's anti – Iran campaign ) actually helps rally a sufficient segment of the Iranian population in support of the government & system there.

    It helps them grow stronger, & stay powerful.

    What to do, then ?

    We first see all issues are related.

    But then we need to separate the issues.

    And view & tackle each of them differently, each on its own merit & level.

    If we tangle all issues together, we end up being used in a people's name in a game serving a very different class of "men".

    Separate the issues to focus on the real ones.

    And you'll have a far better chance of winning in matters of justice for women & the oppressed WHILE helping prevent the danger of war on Iran by the West .

    For internal justice & external war, these two matters, ARE related.

  6. Dear Cindy,

    “The world” is more than we make it .

    If “world” is just shorthand for the “West”, as the media conditions us to think.

    The West’s ( US / EU / israel’s ) motivated & spiralling campaign against Iran fools no one.

    But, you see, it ( the West’s anti – Iran campaign ) actually helps rally a sufficient segment of the Iranian population in support of the government & system there.

    It helps them grow stronger, & stay powerful.

    What to do, then ?

    We first see all issues are related.

    But then we need to separate the issues.

    And view & tackle each of them differently, each on its own merit & level.

    If we tangle all issues together, we end up being used in a people’s name in a game serving a very different class of “men”.

    Separate the issues to focus on the real ones.

    And you’ll have a far better chance of winning in matters of justice for women & the oppressed WHILE helping prevent the danger of war on Iran by the West .

    For internal justice & external war, these two matters, ARE related.

  7. A. Savage, you don't know shit. You are an idiot and a terrorist sympathizer and this is coming from an Iranian you ignorant dumb nut

  8. Is there anything we can do as Americans to halt this practice? Perhaps by education of women, or aiding the citizens of these countries to speak up against these practices? Outsiders can't go in and just effect change in another country, the countrymen/women themselves have to want to do it…but this is just so frustrating!

  9. A. Savage, you don’t know shit. You are an idiot and a terrorist sympathizer and this is coming from an Iranian you ignorant dumb nut

  10. If Iran does this, I call on the people of every city on earth where there is an Iranian embassy or consulate to stone it. Destroy it.

  11. Is there anything we can do as Americans to halt this practice? Perhaps by education of women, or aiding the citizens of these countries to speak up against these practices? Outsiders can’t go in and just effect change in another country, the countrymen/women themselves have to want to do it…but this is just so frustrating!

  12. I sypathize with Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani and her two children. What a horrible example this is to all of humanity. You must release Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani as an indication of what what your relegion truely teaches if not in the name of all that is holy.

  13. If Iran does this, I call on the people of every city on earth where there is an Iranian embassy or consulate to stone it. Destroy it.

  14. In response to Jody's posting–In fact, Iranians themselves—and in particular Iranian women’s rights activists– have organized and carried out a vigorous campaign against the practice of stoning and have themselves been actively documenting the practice. The noted Iranian lawyer and women's rights activist Shadi Sadr–who was arrested and detained last summer–has been a key figure in the movement to stop stoning. Opposition to the practice occurs at the highest level of the Iranian legal system; the former Head of the Iranian Judiciary Ayatollah Shahroudi announced a moratorium on stoning back in 2002 and it was reiterated in August 2008. Today the Iranian Embassy in London stated that there was to be no stoning of Ms Ashtiani. Thanks to all of those who sent messages to the Iranian authorities about this case. Please note that female Kurdish political activist Zeynab Jalalian still faces imminent execution by hanging. She was convicted of "Moharebeh" or "enmity against God" after deeply flawed legal proceedings. Please take action to save her life. Thank you.

    Elise Auerbach
    Iran Country Specialist, Amnesty International USA

  15. I sypathize with Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani and her two children. What a horrible example this is to all of humanity. You must release Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani as an indication of what what your relegion truely teaches if not in the name of all that is holy.

  16. I am sickened by such harsh unfairness, especially against innocent women accused for unjustified reasons and I oppose any death penalties. I wish all countries would stop doing this; cruel physical punishment does not make us safer; especially against harmless people who have committed no real crimes.

  17. God forgive you all for your cruel hearts and your fossilized “religion.”

  18. In response to Jody’s posting–In fact, Iranians themselves—and in particular Iranian women’s rights activists– have organized and carried out a vigorous campaign against the practice of stoning and have themselves been actively documenting the practice. The noted Iranian lawyer and women’s rights activist Shadi Sadr–who was arrested and detained last summer–has been a key figure in the movement to stop stoning. Opposition to the practice occurs at the highest level of the Iranian legal system; the former Head of the Iranian Judiciary Ayatollah Shahroudi announced a moratorium on stoning back in 2002 and it was reiterated in August 2008. Today the Iranian Embassy in London stated that there was to be no stoning of Ms Ashtiani. Thanks to all of those who sent messages to the Iranian authorities about this case. Please note that female Kurdish political activist Zeynab Jalalian still faces imminent execution by hanging. She was convicted of “Moharebeh” or “enmity against God” after deeply flawed legal proceedings. Please take action to save her life. Thank you.

    Elise Auerbach
    Iran Country Specialist, Amnesty International USA

  19. Dear sizzzz,

    Can't argue with you, for you offer no argument to argue with.

    As for you saying you are Iranian — is that supposed to mean something "special", just by itself ?

    You are Iranian ? Is THAT all your qualification, your argument ?

    When you call me "terrorist sympathiser" — because i oppose war ??? or because i talk against mixing all issues in a single pot ? — your choice of this cheapest of current smears makes me wonder at your true motive, identity & actual agenda.

    i concur wholeheartedly with the anguish & frustrations expressed by Jody, Megan , Isabel , Beverley, & Lisa Raynes.

    Not with Ken Sears. He overshoots the issue at hand with stones in his .

    But you can't argue with those or with abuse, even if sloppily aimed.

  20. I am sickened by such harsh unfairness, especially against innocent women accused for unjustified reasons and I oppose any death penalties. I wish all countries would stop doing this; cruel physical punishment does not make us safer; especially against harmless people who have committed no real crimes.

  21. Bottom fact is that the war has no issue with this. The bottom fact is you claimed that you speak for Iranians in that "many people in Iran support the regime". You are either 1) naive, 2) uneducated, 3) liar, 4) a terrorist sympathizer and liar/manipulator when you say such things.

    Iranians have shown that they have been willing to die for freedoms and democracy. Other than Israel, Iranians are the most pro-American people in the middle east. Iranians value themselves, freedom, and the aspiration for democracy. 75% of Iranians are under the age of 30 and the VAST majority are under the age of 30. Out of this VAST majority, the VAST majority is secular. Iranians are occupied by a terroristic regime that does not follow human rights/human life. This regime must go; and Iranians need the international community to stand by their side.

    By simply looking at history; it is clear the expiration date of this regime is near. It is a matter of the international community continuing sanctions and isolating this terroristic regime in which a nuclear weapon would not only threaten the safety and welfare of Iranians, but of the entire international community. The only mistake Bush made was that he went to war in Iraq and not in Iran. Afterall, Iran was and is the bigger threat and would and post-rebuilding would have been much easier and supported by the vast majority of Iranians.

    When someone who is a terrorist/terrorist sympathizer and justifies violations against human rights such as the barbaric practice of stoning/execution for the simple reason of sex; there really is no debate or argument because this is an issue of civilization and progressivity vs. barbarism and living in the middle ages.

    Like Ken said; it would be a great thing to see people all over the world forcing the Islamic republic of terror's regime and its supproted from embassies throughout the world. There should be a requirement for a basic adherence of human rights and human dignity if you want to be an active member of the international community.

    Also, check your ratings on your posts. You are a numb nut and a terrorist sympathizer. :)

  22. Dear sizzzz,

    Can’t argue with you, for you offer no argument to argue with.

    As for you saying you are Iranian — is that supposed to mean something “special”, just by itself ?

    You are Iranian ? Is THAT all your qualification, your argument ?

    When you call me “terrorist sympathiser” — because i oppose war ??? or because i talk against mixing all issues in a single pot ? — your choice of this cheapest of current smears makes me wonder at your true motive, identity & actual agenda.

    i concur wholeheartedly with the anguish & frustrations expressed by Jody, Megan , Isabel , Beverley, & Lisa Raynes.

    Not with Ken Sears. He overshoots the issue at hand with stones in his .

    But you can’t argue with those or with abuse, even if sloppily aimed.

  23. Dear Sizzz:
    I think calling people "numb nut" by which I am sure you meant to say "Dumb nut" is wholly inappropriate in a forum that is intended to encourage dialogue and understanding about extremely sensitive issues. As a Muslim woman (since you believe that offers some sort of clout when it comes to arguments) I don’t stand by this practice but I believe that resorting to ad homonym attacks will only weaken rather than strengthen your argument.

    “Terrorist Sympathizer”? a. savage made no comment or insinuation that could lead you to believe he or she is a terrorist sympathizer and rather than watering down an important issue to simply west v. east, democracy v. barbarianism, secularism v. religiosity, terrorist sympathizer v. freedom lover, it might be more beneficial and more in line with Amnesty’s role to approach the issue in a legalistic and human rights oriented manner rather than an emotional attack on another person simply because they share a different view. (Though I believe a. savage and you share the same apprehension and disgust for such a backwards practice that everyone else has expressed you both fall into the trap of oversimplifying a complex issue).

    Furthermore, calling for war against another country is in my opinion more backwards and barbaric than any comment a. savage made for the mere fact that advocating for war means you are advocating for crimes against innocent civilians. You may hate the regime and fully support sanctions and an all-out war against Iran, but sanctions and war inevitably harm the people only. Not to mention, war means death by some of the most inhumane and barbaric weapons this planet has seen (just read Amnesty’s report on the Gaza War and the use of Phosphorous weapons), which in my opinion will cause more painful deaths to thousands more people than this innocent woman would have faced. However as the Quran says, if you kill one person it is as if you have killed all of humanity so human life should not be disregarded regardless of the number of deaths.

    As Elise noted above though, due to pressure from the international community, she has had her sentence revoked. You don’t need guns to put pressure and force change. We can affect change through other means more in line with Amnesty’s creed and I believe advocating for war and ad homonym attacks just aren’t the approaches to take.

  24. Bottom fact is that the war has no issue with this. The bottom fact is you claimed that you speak for Iranians in that “many people in Iran support the regime”. You are either 1) naive, 2) uneducated, 3) liar, 4) a terrorist sympathizer and liar/manipulator when you say such things.

    Iranians have shown that they have been willing to die for freedoms and democracy. Other than Israel, Iranians are the most pro-American people in the middle east. Iranians value themselves, freedom, and the aspiration for democracy. 75% of Iranians are under the age of 30 and the VAST majority are under the age of 30. Out of this VAST majority, the VAST majority is secular. Iranians are occupied by a terroristic regime that does not follow human rights/human life. This regime must go; and Iranians need the international community to stand by their side.

    By simply looking at history; it is clear the expiration date of this regime is near. It is a matter of the international community continuing sanctions and isolating this terroristic regime in which a nuclear weapon would not only threaten the safety and welfare of Iranians, but of the entire international community. The only mistake Bush made was that he went to war in Iraq and not in Iran. Afterall, Iran was and is the bigger threat and would and post-rebuilding would have been much easier and supported by the vast majority of Iranians.

    When someone who is a terrorist/terrorist sympathizer and justifies violations against human rights such as the barbaric practice of stoning/execution for the simple reason of sex; there really is no debate or argument because this is an issue of civilization and progressivity vs. barbarism and living in the middle ages.

    Like Ken said; it would be a great thing to see people all over the world forcing the Islamic republic of terror’s regime and its supproted from embassies throughout the world. There should be a requirement for a basic adherence of human rights and human dignity if you want to be an active member of the international community.

    Also, check your ratings on your posts. You are a numb nut and a terrorist sympathizer. :)

  25. Dear Sizzz:
    I think calling people “numb nut” by which I am sure you meant to say “Dumb nut” is wholly inappropriate in a forum that is intended to encourage dialogue and understanding about extremely sensitive issues. As a Muslim woman (since you believe that offers some sort of clout when it comes to arguments) I don’t stand by this practice but I believe that resorting to ad homonym attacks will only weaken rather than strengthen your argument.

    “Terrorist Sympathizer”? a. savage made no comment or insinuation that could lead you to believe he or she is a terrorist sympathizer and rather than watering down an important issue to simply west v. east, democracy v. barbarianism, secularism v. religiosity, terrorist sympathizer v. freedom lover, it might be more beneficial and more in line with Amnesty’s role to approach the issue in a legalistic and human rights oriented manner rather than an emotional attack on another person simply because they share a different view. (Though I believe a. savage and you share the same apprehension and disgust for such a backwards practice that everyone else has expressed you both fall into the trap of oversimplifying a complex issue).

    Furthermore, calling for war against another country is in my opinion more backwards and barbaric than any comment a. savage made for the mere fact that advocating for war means you are advocating for crimes against innocent civilians. You may hate the regime and fully support sanctions and an all-out war against Iran, but sanctions and war inevitably harm the people only. Not to mention, war means death by some of the most inhumane and barbaric weapons this planet has seen (just read Amnesty’s report on the Gaza War and the use of Phosphorous weapons), which in my opinion will cause more painful deaths to thousands more people than this innocent woman would have faced. However as the Quran says, if you kill one person it is as if you have killed all of humanity so human life should not be disregarded regardless of the number of deaths.

    As Elise noted above though, due to pressure from the international community, she has had her sentence revoked. You don’t need guns to put pressure and force change. We can affect change through other means more in line with Amnesty’s creed and I believe advocating for war and ad homonym attacks just aren’t the approaches to take.

  26. The bottom line is that the death sentence still stands. This case is more than about this individual case: it is about the barbaric system of islamic law. A "hanging" sentence still stands so this issue and the issue of islamic barbarism is far from over. In this case I believe she did not commit adultery; but in any case, this is about something such as adultery is a personal issue and the governments of the world have no right to put their viewpoints and their religious dogma on the rest of us (citizens of the world). This is far from resolved and more needs to be exposed on the truth of islamic justice.

  27. The bottom line is you should be more careful with the arguments you make which includes refraining from sweeping generalizations and attacks on character that are disrespectful and wholly unfounded. If you disagree with "Islamic Justice" (however you define it, considering that it can mean different things to different sects) then state your arguments so that other viewpoints can be made and we can engage in conversations on the issues. Stoning is backwards and barbaric but so is death by firing squad which was just recently abolished in Utah. Not to mention we (in the US) still have the death penalty. Progress is slow but justice (however you want to define it) will prevail even if it takes years to achieve.

  28. to Hadia:

    The death penalty is wrong no matter what (except in cases of terrorism where future lives may be at stake); but in the U.S., women are not "executed" for adultery or for having sex.

    Iranians are already ready for democracy and freedoms. This is a regime which oppresses it's own people through Islamic justice and Islamic law. It's fine that you try to sugar coat your quran; but it is in your own quran to which stoning is supported and other various means of oppression against women and against freedoms such as freedom of religion. The death penalty for this women still stands; and this issue is far from over as simply they will decide to be so "humane" and hang her instead. Don't try to sugar coat the barbaric nature of islamic jurisprudence. Please, name me one successful/democratic islamic country?

  29. Again, my main point all along has been there is no debate on this issue because this is an issue of human rights/human civilization vs. barbarism/living in the stone age and being against the progress of the human race.

  30. I never sugar coated the Quran so I am not sure why you are making that argument. As for what your main point all along has been, if I recall correctly it started off by calling someone a "dumb nut" and "terrorist sympathizer". So my only point in responding is to raise the argument that such statements are not appropriate and if you want to make an argument you can do so while being respectful.

    As for the death sentence through stoning, if you've read the Quran you would know that it applies to both men and women (so in Islam it is not a woman's rights issue but more generally a human one) and that it is not the only prescribed means of carrying out a death sentence.Furthermore, there are rules and regulations in Islam (that may or may not be in force in Iran) that make it very difficult to receive a death sentence. In the end, does Islam sanction the death sentence, yes it does (as do Christianity and Judaism- not that that justifies it in any way). Is that barbaric, that is your decision to make. You claim the death sentence should be reserved for terrorists. But if the death sentence is inherently barbaric, how can you sanction it under any pretense? If someone enters a school yard and opens fire on his or her classmates, do they deserve the death sentence? How do you even define terrorist? Also, locking someone up in jail indefinitely can be construed as inhumane and cruel punishment. The European Court of Human Rights seems to think extraditing its citizens to face possible death sentences or life sentences in the US amounts to a violation of their right to be free from cruel and inhumane punishment.

    I guess the final point I am trying to make, is that no system is perfect. I don't think a successful democracy (once again depends on how you define it) exists in any part of the world. But that is a different argument altogether. I think we both agree that stoning is backwards and should not be employed. I just wanted to state that I prefer arguments be made that do not oversimplify situations nor involve calling others offensive and unfounded names.

  31. Stop trying to sugar coat the fact of islamic jurisprudence. A women is worth 1/2 of a man in Islamic law and in your holy quran.

    Also, where are American Muslim leaders claiming how appalling this death sentence for adultery is? This case is far from over and the bigger issue is the barbaric nature of islamic jurisprudence and in this case the execution of an innocent women. Again, even if she had committed adultery (which I don't believe is the case); the death penalty or any form of punishment is not in any way applicable to human rights and the freedoms of human beings aspired throughout the free world.

  32. I think I have made my point very clear so I won't engage any further in this discussion. I also appreciate that you have chosen to engage in a discussion rather than calling me names (which was my point all along).

    As for women being worth 1/2 a man in Islamic law and in the holy Quran, I would ask that you open an actual Quranic text and find exactly where such a claim is made before you present it as fact. I would also ask that you try and understand that Islamic jurisprudence is not monolithic and is not homogeneous. There are many different interpretations of the text (as in any form of law) and as a result several different perspectives.

    I appreciate your engagement and I too hope that justice will prevail for Sakineh.

  33. "As for the death sentence through stoning, if you’ve read the Quran you would know that it applies to both men and women (so in Islam it is not a woman’s rights issue but more generally a human one)"

    In principle, true. Except you forgot a major point. A man is buried half way and a women to her neck and if during the stoning; it is shown they escaped death, then it must "mean" that god spared them. I am sure moving around dodging the rocks makes it much easier for men than women. Also, let's not forget that the men committing the adultery are not stoned, they only receive lashes.

    "there are rules and regulations in Islam (that may or may not be in force in Iran) that make it very difficult to receive a death sentence"

    Really? Like 4-witnesses claiming to seen the act of adultery? Again, the "words" of 4-witnesses. If you don't have those "witnesses" then a confession is enough. How to get the confession? Torturing sure works…just like this case!

    VERY difficult. No DNA evidence, no NOTHING; plus, the simple fact that it is just sex! Where in the western civilized world are you executed over SEX? This shows the barbaric nature of islamic jurisprudence.

    Also, for Christianity, ever heard the words of love your enemy? Islamic is a god who makes you fear him and fear life so that you must obey. I am not a Christian; but Christianity is much more peaceful than Islam and the message of Jesus is the message of peace and love. Christianity has been able to progress to the 21st century and to the modern/peaceful western world in which Islam has not been able to because of the requirement of islamic jurisprudence in the quran.

    "You claim the death sentence should be reserved for terrorists. But if the death sentence is inherently barbaric, how can you sanction it under any pretense? If someone enters a school yard and opens fire on his or her classmates, do they deserve the death sentence? How do you even define terrorist? Also, locking someone up in jail indefinitely can be construed as inhumane and cruel punishment. The European Court of Human Rights seems to think extraditing its citizens to face possible death sentences or life sentences in the US amounts to a violation of their right to be free from cruel and inhumane punishment. "

    Again, I am against the death penalty in the U.S.; but you try to divert the point by mentioning the death penalty exists in the U.S. While true, in the U.S. you can't have someone executed because of SEX or "Adultery". The crime must be murder and generally DNA evidence is required.

    As for the only way I see the death penalty applicable in the western world; is in the case of terrorism. Why? Because in the future members of that terrorist group can take hostages demanding the release of that terrorist or else the killings of innocent civilians.

    Again, you use a clever tactic trying to divert the major issues involved such as islamic jurisprudence in the matter of PERSONAL LIVES in which islam does not value. Again, I ask where are the American Muslim leaders when it comes to issues like this?

    And yes, I have read the quran.

  34. I was not trying to use clever tactics and I apologize if it came off that way. Also, I did not ask you if you had read the Quran but thank you for sharing. I only asked that you present textual arguments rather than regurgitating, what I perceive to be, misconceptions about Islam (keeping in mind that there are different interpretations of course).

    In any case, thank you for your opinions. I may disagree with them but this isn't the intended forum for this discussion so I will cease to respond at this point.

  35. The bottom line is that the death sentence still stands. This case is more than about this individual case: it is about the barbaric system of islamic law. A “hanging” sentence still stands so this issue and the issue of islamic barbarism is far from over. In this case I believe she did not commit adultery; but in any case, this is about something such as adultery is a personal issue and the governments of the world have no right to put their viewpoints and their religious dogma on the rest of us (citizens of the world). This is far from resolved and more needs to be exposed on the truth of islamic justice.

  36. The bottom line is you should be more careful with the arguments you make which includes refraining from sweeping generalizations and attacks on character that are disrespectful and wholly unfounded. If you disagree with “Islamic Justice” (however you define it, considering that it can mean different things to different sects) then state your arguments so that other viewpoints can be made and we can engage in conversations on the issues. Stoning is backwards and barbaric but so is death by firing squad which was just recently abolished in Utah. Not to mention we (in the US) still have the death penalty. Progress is slow but justice (however you want to define it) will prevail even if it takes years to achieve.

  37. to Hadia:

    The death penalty is wrong no matter what (except in cases of terrorism where future lives may be at stake); but in the U.S., women are not “executed” for adultery or for having sex.

    Iranians are already ready for democracy and freedoms. This is a regime which oppresses it’s own people through Islamic justice and Islamic law. It’s fine that you try to sugar coat your quran; but it is in your own quran to which stoning is supported and other various means of oppression against women and against freedoms such as freedom of religion. The death penalty for this women still stands; and this issue is far from over as simply they will decide to be so “humane” and hang her instead. Don’t try to sugar coat the barbaric nature of islamic jurisprudence. Please, name me one successful/democratic islamic country?

  38. Again, my main point all along has been there is no debate on this issue because this is an issue of human rights/human civilization vs. barbarism/living in the stone age and being against the progress of the human race.

  39. I never sugar coated the Quran so I am not sure why you are making that argument. As for what your main point all along has been, if I recall correctly it started off by calling someone a “dumb nut” and “terrorist sympathizer”. So my only point in responding is to raise the argument that such statements are not appropriate and if you want to make an argument you can do so while being respectful.

    As for the death sentence through stoning, if you’ve read the Quran you would know that it applies to both men and women (so in Islam it is not a woman’s rights issue but more generally a human one) and that it is not the only prescribed means of carrying out a death sentence.Furthermore, there are rules and regulations in Islam (that may or may not be in force in Iran) that make it very difficult to receive a death sentence. In the end, does Islam sanction the death sentence, yes it does (as do Christianity and Judaism- not that that justifies it in any way). Is that barbaric, that is your decision to make. You claim the death sentence should be reserved for terrorists. But if the death sentence is inherently barbaric, how can you sanction it under any pretense? If someone enters a school yard and opens fire on his or her classmates, do they deserve the death sentence? How do you even define terrorist? Also, locking someone up in jail indefinitely can be construed as inhumane and cruel punishment. The European Court of Human Rights seems to think extraditing its citizens to face possible death sentences or life sentences in the US amounts to a violation of their right to be free from cruel and inhumane punishment.

    I guess the final point I am trying to make, is that no system is perfect. I don’t think a successful democracy (once again depends on how you define it) exists in any part of the world. But that is a different argument altogether. I think we both agree that stoning is backwards and should not be employed. I just wanted to state that I prefer arguments be made that do not oversimplify situations nor involve calling others offensive and unfounded names.

  40. Stop trying to sugar coat the fact of islamic jurisprudence. A women is worth 1/2 of a man in Islamic law and in your holy quran.

    Also, where are American Muslim leaders claiming how appalling this death sentence for adultery is? This case is far from over and the bigger issue is the barbaric nature of islamic jurisprudence and in this case the execution of an innocent women. Again, even if she had committed adultery (which I don’t believe is the case); the death penalty or any form of punishment is not in any way applicable to human rights and the freedoms of human beings aspired throughout the free world.

  41. I think I have made my point very clear so I won’t engage any further in this discussion. I also appreciate that you have chosen to engage in a discussion rather than calling me names (which was my point all along).

    As for women being worth 1/2 a man in Islamic law and in the holy Quran, I would ask that you open an actual Quranic text and find exactly where such a claim is made before you present it as fact. I would also ask that you try and understand that Islamic jurisprudence is not monolithic and is not homogeneous. There are many different interpretations of the text (as in any form of law) and as a result several different perspectives.

    I appreciate your engagement and I too hope that justice will prevail for Sakineh.

  42. “As for the death sentence through stoning, if you’ve read the Quran you would know that it applies to both men and women (so in Islam it is not a woman’s rights issue but more generally a human one)”

    In principle, true. Except you forgot a major point. A man is buried half way and a women to her neck and if during the stoning; it is shown they escaped death, then it must “mean” that god spared them. I am sure moving around dodging the rocks makes it much easier for men than women. Also, let’s not forget that the men committing the adultery are not stoned, they only receive lashes.

    “there are rules and regulations in Islam (that may or may not be in force in Iran) that make it very difficult to receive a death sentence”

    Really? Like 4-witnesses claiming to seen the act of adultery? Again, the “words” of 4-witnesses. If you don’t have those “witnesses” then a confession is enough. How to get the confession? Torturing sure works…just like this case!

    VERY difficult. No DNA evidence, no NOTHING; plus, the simple fact that it is just sex! Where in the western civilized world are you executed over SEX? This shows the barbaric nature of islamic jurisprudence.

    Also, for Christianity, ever heard the words of love your enemy? Islamic is a god who makes you fear him and fear life so that you must obey. I am not a Christian; but Christianity is much more peaceful than Islam and the message of Jesus is the message of peace and love. Christianity has been able to progress to the 21st century and to the modern/peaceful western world in which Islam has not been able to because of the requirement of islamic jurisprudence in the quran.

    “You claim the death sentence should be reserved for terrorists. But if the death sentence is inherently barbaric, how can you sanction it under any pretense? If someone enters a school yard and opens fire on his or her classmates, do they deserve the death sentence? How do you even define terrorist? Also, locking someone up in jail indefinitely can be construed as inhumane and cruel punishment. The European Court of Human Rights seems to think extraditing its citizens to face possible death sentences or life sentences in the US amounts to a violation of their right to be free from cruel and inhumane punishment. ”

    Again, I am against the death penalty in the U.S.; but you try to divert the point by mentioning the death penalty exists in the U.S. While true, in the U.S. you can’t have someone executed because of SEX or “Adultery”. The crime must be murder and generally DNA evidence is required.

    As for the only way I see the death penalty applicable in the western world; is in the case of terrorism. Why? Because in the future members of that terrorist group can take hostages demanding the release of that terrorist or else the killings of innocent civilians.

    Again, you use a clever tactic trying to divert the major issues involved such as islamic jurisprudence in the matter of PERSONAL LIVES in which islam does not value. Again, I ask where are the American Muslim leaders when it comes to issues like this?

    And yes, I have read the quran.

  43. I was not trying to use clever tactics and I apologize if it came off that way. Also, I did not ask you if you had read the Quran but thank you for sharing. I only asked that you present textual arguments rather than regurgitating, what I perceive to be, misconceptions about Islam (keeping in mind that there are different interpretations of course).

    In any case, thank you for your opinions. I may disagree with them but this isn’t the intended forum for this discussion so I will cease to respond at this point.

  44. Amazing how some people get so concerned over the possibility of a building being stoned. We sure wouldn't want to hurt any buildings now, would we? I suppose that some people love buildings more than… people.

  45. I suppose some people think the stoning of a building is… well… savage.

  46. Amazing how some people get so concerned over the possibility of a building being stoned. We sure wouldn’t want to hurt any buildings now, would we? I suppose that some people love buildings more than… people.

  47. Why did Hadia pull out from an interesting discussion about Islam and the way those sociteties treat its people? Because she couldn't (or wouldn't) answer two key facts – in the Koran, women ARE defined as inferior, and the fact that Muslim leaders throughout the world do not speak out against such violent acts as stoning, even when they belong to a so-called 'liberal' interpretation of Islam.

  48. Andy, I pulled out of the discussion because I believed I made the point I came to make: arguments should be made in a respectful and articulate manner. It is obvious that we have different views on Islam and I do not intend to use this forum to press my views upon anyone else. However, I will state some final responses. As I explained earlier, Islam can and is interpreted in different ways, so to generalize about how Islam treats its followers is highly problematic.

    In response to your statement about giving you a discussion about “Islam and the way those societies treat its people,” I reply: a) which societies are you talking about? b) Laws, including American laws etc require interpretation so there are many different views, no ideology is homogenous or monolithic and C) religion, like every other ideology can be abused such that the way followers practice it does not necessarily reflect the principles of the religion (ie KKK and Christianity). So when the Taleban claimed to be acting in the name of Islam, one has to revert back to the original text and look at the multitude of arguments made to find out what is the most common or adhered to interpretation.

    This is what the Quran says about Adultery:
    And punish them both, the man and the woman, whoever are guilty of it (adultery); then if they repent and become pious, leave them; indeed Allah is the Most Acceptor Of Repentance, Most Merciful. (4:16)

    So it is a punishment for both MEN and women and one that should not be invoked if the perpetrator repents. Islamically, a punishment for adultery is difficult to administer. Whether you think it should be administered at all is your own personal opinion.

    Now what punishment does the Quran prescribe?

    The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication, flog each of them with a hundred stripes. (24:2)

    So in response to your question about Scholarly intervention, there is debate about whether stoning is the appropriate punishment for adultery since the Quran does not mention it. Stoning is mentioned in the hadiths (narrations of the Prophet) and it is important to check the validity of such sources before taking them to be fact. Therefore, this is an issue debated in the Muslim community.

    Finally, to claim that it is “fact” that women in the Koran are defined as inferior, is not only an inaccurate reflection of the Quran but reveals your lack of understanding when it comes to these issues. The Quran does not state that women are inferior. Can certain verses be interpreted to make it seem like it does, sure, that is the problem with interpretation. However nothing in the Quran says a woman is worth half a man or that she is inferior point blank. To the contrary Islam guarantees many rights to woman that unfortunately have not been implemented in societies that claim to adhere to Islamic law. For example: a woman is allowed to work and encouraged to get an education. The Prophet said: Seeking knowledge is the religious duty of every man and WOMAN. Women in Islam are permitted to keep their money for their own purposes while men are required to provide for a family. In an entire chapter in the Quran dedicated to women known as Al-Nisa: God says: And give the women their bridal money willingly; then if they willingly give you a part of it, eat (use) it with joy and fruition. (4:4) So a woman’s wealth belongs to her only and she is free to use it in any way she pleases. In the second chapter of the Quran God states “They (women) are raiment (comfort, embellishment and protection) for you, and you (men) are raiment for them. (Surah al-Baqarah: 2 : 187). So men are equal partners in Islam as sources of support and comfort for one another. There are many more examples, but these are just a few.

    Now you may disagree with me on these issues and their interpretations but you have the intellectual capacity (I am assuming) to research and come to your own conclusions. That is why I do not feel the need to argue or discuss this issue further.

  49. Why did Hadia pull out from an interesting discussion about Islam and the way those sociteties treat its people? Because she couldn’t (or wouldn’t) answer two key facts – in the Koran, women ARE defined as inferior, and the fact that Muslim leaders throughout the world do not speak out against such violent acts as stoning, even when they belong to a so-called ‘liberal’ interpretation of Islam.

  50. Andy, I pulled out of the discussion because I believed I made the point I came to make: arguments should be made in a respectful and articulate manner. It is obvious that we have different views on Islam and I do not intend to use this forum to press my views upon anyone else. However, I will state some final responses. As I explained earlier, Islam can and is interpreted in different ways, so to generalize about how Islam treats its followers is highly problematic.

    In response to your statement about giving you a discussion about “Islam and the way those societies treat its people,” I reply: a) which societies are you talking about? b) Laws, including American laws etc require interpretation so there are many different views, no ideology is homogenous or monolithic and C) religion, like every other ideology can be abused such that the way followers practice it does not necessarily reflect the principles of the religion (ie KKK and Christianity). So when the Taleban claimed to be acting in the name of Islam, one has to revert back to the original text and look at the multitude of arguments made to find out what is the most common or adhered to interpretation.

    This is what the Quran says about Adultery:
    And punish them both, the man and the woman, whoever are guilty of it (adultery); then if they repent and become pious, leave them; indeed Allah is the Most Acceptor Of Repentance, Most Merciful. (4:16)

    So it is a punishment for both MEN and women and one that should not be invoked if the perpetrator repents. Islamically, a punishment for adultery is difficult to administer. Whether you think it should be administered at all is your own personal opinion.

    Now what punishment does the Quran prescribe?

    The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication, flog each of them with a hundred stripes. (24:2)

    So in response to your question about Scholarly intervention, there is debate about whether stoning is the appropriate punishment for adultery since the Quran does not mention it. Stoning is mentioned in the hadiths (narrations of the Prophet) and it is important to check the validity of such sources before taking them to be fact. Therefore, this is an issue debated in the Muslim community.

    Finally, to claim that it is “fact” that women in the Koran are defined as inferior, is not only an inaccurate reflection of the Quran but reveals your lack of understanding when it comes to these issues. The Quran does not state that women are inferior. Can certain verses be interpreted to make it seem like it does, sure, that is the problem with interpretation. However nothing in the Quran says a woman is worth half a man or that she is inferior point blank. To the contrary Islam guarantees many rights to woman that unfortunately have not been implemented in societies that claim to adhere to Islamic law. For example: a woman is allowed to work and encouraged to get an education. The Prophet said: Seeking knowledge is the religious duty of every man and WOMAN. Women in Islam are permitted to keep their money for their own purposes while men are required to provide for a family. In an entire chapter in the Quran dedicated to women known as Al-Nisa: God says: And give the women their bridal money willingly; then if they willingly give you a part of it, eat (use) it with joy and fruition. (4:4) So a woman’s wealth belongs to her only and she is free to use it in any way she pleases. In the second chapter of the Quran God states “They (women) are raiment (comfort, embellishment and protection) for you, and you (men) are raiment for them. (Surah al-Baqarah: 2 : 187). So men are equal partners in Islam as sources of support and comfort for one another. There are many more examples, but these are just a few.

    Now you may disagree with me on these issues and their interpretations but you have the intellectual capacity (I am assuming) to research and come to your own conclusions. That is why I do not feel the need to argue or discuss this issue further.

  51. And New York politicians are allowing a Mosque to be built
    where Muslims murdered all those folks on September 11th.

    INSANITY!

  52. And New York politicians are allowing a Mosque to be built
    where Muslims murdered all those folks on September 11th.

    INSANITY!

  53. In the Quran it is stated that it is acceptable to lie/deceive to fool the "unbelievers". That is exactly what Hadia is doing. She likes to take parts of the quran instead of showing the parts where women are clearly inferior to men. For example, a women's testimony is worth 1/2 of a man in court. So in practice, if a women is raped, she actually is in risk of execution because her word is 1/2 of a man. It can be stated and shown over and over; but out of all the world religions, clearly Islam is the most barbaric religion which can not be "reformed" for true believers. Those Muslims who are "moderate" or just call themselves Muslim but do not practice, I call them fake Muslims. Hadia also likes to show how the KKK call themselves Christians; but the fact of the matter is a very high percentage of Muslims throughout the world support terrorism or justify it by blaming the west. I am proud to be an Iranian; because I call the majority of Iranians fake Muslims. The majority of Iranians believe in a god hence calling themselves Muslim but do not practice, pray etc. and are very pro-west and pro-American. On top of that, in Iran there are prob. more atheists than in the U.S. and many simply in private refuse to call themselves Muslim. The only good thing about the regime in Tehran is that once this regime is gone; Iran will never ever revert back to Islam in government and I believe that in a generation or two, Islam will most likely cease to exist in Iran. This is what differs Iranians from Arabs and other Muslims; Iranians in vast majority are fake Muslims :)

  54. In the Quran it is stated that it is acceptable to lie/deceive to fool the “unbelievers”. That is exactly what Hadia is doing. She likes to take parts of the quran instead of showing the parts where women are clearly inferior to men. For example, a women’s testimony is worth 1/2 of a man in court. So in practice, if a women is raped, she actually is in risk of execution because her word is 1/2 of a man. It can be stated and shown over and over; but out of all the world religions, clearly Islam is the most barbaric religion which can not be “reformed” for true believers. Those Muslims who are “moderate” or just call themselves Muslim but do not practice, I call them fake Muslims. Hadia also likes to show how the KKK call themselves Christians; but the fact of the matter is a very high percentage of Muslims throughout the world support terrorism or justify it by blaming the west. I am proud to be an Iranian; because I call the majority of Iranians fake Muslims. The majority of Iranians believe in a god hence calling themselves Muslim but do not practice, pray etc. and are very pro-west and pro-American. On top of that, in Iran there are prob. more atheists than in the U.S. and many simply in private refuse to call themselves Muslim. The only good thing about the regime in Tehran is that once this regime is gone; Iran will never ever revert back to Islam in government and I believe that in a generation or two, Islam will most likely cease to exist in Iran. This is what differs Iranians from Arabs and other Muslims; Iranians in vast majority are fake Muslims :)

  55. This is total injustice.If it had been a man accused of adultery would the sentence have been so extreme-no i do not think so.No body has the right to kill another especially in such an inhuman way.This must stop immediately

  56. It astonishes me that the word "inhuman" is used together with acts that are always committed by humans. Stoning and killing, a truly "human" act I would say.

  57. This is total injustice.If it had been a man accused of adultery would the sentence have been so extreme-no i do not think so.No body has the right to kill another especially in such an inhuman way.This must stop immediately

  58. It astonishes me that the word “inhuman” is used together with acts that are always committed by humans. Stoning and killing, a truly “human” act I would say.