13-year-old stoned to death in Somalia

28 Responses to “13-year-old stoned to death in Somalia”

1. Pyrrho on November 22nd, 2008 7:44 am 1

   Just gotta love that ol’ time religion.

   This sort of thing is nearly as insane as prohibiting condom use in AIDS ravaged sub Saharan Africa.
   That unfortunate policy kills a lot more than Somali gibbers.
2. H on November 22nd, 2008 7:13 pm 2

   This isn’t so much an issue of religion, as it is an abuse of religion.. The very thing that Jesus condemned the whole time he was around!

   Maybe there’d be more action about this if there was oil in Somalia…
3. Alistair on November 22nd, 2008 7:24 pm 3

   This is a cultural issue, not religious.

   A related story appeared in The Australian today. The leading Muslim cleric wants to desegregate mosques so men and women can pray together. He says the separation is a cultural practice, not based on theology.
4. Pyrrho on November 23rd, 2008 9:16 am 4

   I beg to differ.
   This monstrous act is a direct result of interpretation of religious texts as the actual instructions of a deity.

   Unless of course, you refer to the culturally different method of dispatch employed on a Saudi adulteress, that being decapitation.

   Isn’t it time to leave medieval lies, violence, fear, ignorance and superstition behind?
5. Alistair on November 23rd, 2008 11:18 am 5

   Actually, the Old Testament is the only sacred text which prescribes stoning as punishment for adultery. Fortunately, Jewish culture has moved on.

   The New Testament says: “Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone.”

   The Koran makes no call for stoning. It’s enshrined in Sharia law. Muslim clerics should be leading the campaign to end these barbaric cultural practices.
6. Pyrrho on November 23rd, 2008 7:42 pm 6

   Agreed, along with the delightful practice of infibulation
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infibulation
   and female circumcision.

   These abhorrent practices are not solely confined to Islam.
   There are other women hating religions that commit these crimes as well.
7. Ebony Jackson on November 23rd, 2008 7:51 pm 7

   I am so pleased I don’t do religion.

   Violence, torture, murder, humiliation, degradation….all despicable behaviour in any language.

   The death penalty for all perpetrators of any of these abhorrent acts….no matter what belief system or culture you claim as an excuse to practice your evil.
8. Jim R on December 18th, 2008 3:04 pm 8

   Ah, yes… Islam – more like the religion of “pieces,” no peace. But then, they are just following their leader who advocated killing and terror. So… why should anyone be surprised?
9. Jim R on December 18th, 2008 3:07 pm 9

   Hmmmm… Ebony says she is so pleased she doesn’t do any religion. Funny, Dr. R.J. Rummel estimates atheistic communism murdered around 160 MILLION (!!) last century, and when the Soviet archives were opened in the early 1990s, they noted there had been around 60 million “excess” (their words, not mine) deaths.

   In fact, those of no religion are the largest mass murderers in history. But then Dostoyevski noted, if there is no God, **everything** is permissible. If folks can’t make a distinction between Islam and Christianity, well, then, I guess they haven’t read the Bible or the Qu’ran, and done a comparison.
10. Ebony Jackson on December 18th, 2008 4:04 pm 10

    I guess it depends on the values you uphold and your belief in the goodness of human nature.
    I am proudly anti the doctrines of Christianity and will always defend my atheist view.
    To hide behind a **religion** whether it be Christianity or Islam, does not afford anyone permission to commit crimes against humanity.

    And – Jim R, I have read the Bible…the old and the new, from cover to cover. To me it was nothing but a load of unrealistic nonsense..hero worship..violence…criminal behaviour..threats by intimidation…superegos…power- trips, and control by manipulation.

    No, I don’t do religion or the “God” thing.
    Science…facts…evidence.. will always work for me.
11. Pyrrho on December 18th, 2008 8:39 pm 11

    When Jim R says;
    “In fact, those of no religion are the largest mass murderers in history”
    He is guilty of the following logical fallacies.

    1) Appeal to emotion:
    Where an argument is made due to the manipulation of emotions, rather than the use of valid reasoning

    2) Post-hoc ergo propter hoc;
    This fallacy follows the basic format of: A preceded B, therefore A caused B, and therefore assumes cause and effect for two events just because they are temporally related (the Latin translates to “after this, therefore because of this”).

    3)Confusing association with causation;
    This is similar to the post-hoc fallacy in that it assumes cause and effect for two variables simply because they are correlated, although the relationship here is not strictly that of one variable following the other in time. This fallacy is often used to give a statistical correlation a causal interpretation. For example, during the 1990’s both religious attendance and illegal drug use have been on the rise. It would be a fallacy to conclude that therefore, religious attendance causes illegal drug use. It is also possible that drug use leads to an increase in religious attendance, or that both drug use and religious attendance are increased by a third variable, such as an increase in societal unrest. It is also possible that both variables are independent of one another, and it is mere coincidence that they are both increasing at the same time. A corollary to this is the invocation of this logical fallacy to argue that an association does not represent causation, rather it is more accurate to say that correlation does not necessarily mean causation, but it can. Also, multiple independent correlations can point reliably to a causation, and is a reasonable line of argument.

    (thanks to the S.G.U)

    I have a couple of questions for you Jim.
    Is it only because you have faith in (insert deity of choice) that you do not go about inflicting misery and all manner of evils on your fellow man? Is it the fear of eternal damnation in a lake of fire (or such like) the only thing that is keeping you on the rails? If this is the case, then what of the secular who are all round nice folk. Are they going to burn, just because they don’t believe in some supernatural overlord?

    What of the inmates currently incarcerated in or penal system. As athiests are, by your reckoning, candidates for mass homicide, surely we should see some evidence of this trend in the attendance levels at the big house’s chapel?

    All three Abrahamic religions are no more or less plausible than any other you might name. Scientology, Shinto, Norse Gods, Greek gods, Flying Spaghetti Monsters et al. There is no distinction. They are all products of the pre-scientific age, where fear, ignorance, lies and superstition held sway. In this post enlightenment era, we don’t need religion to explain why the sky rumbles, the ground shakes, and the sun rises.

    We have science, which provides answers based on the best available evidence at the time, subject to better being found. This is called the scientific method, thus making science a self policing organism.

    Unlike religion, which tends to deal only in absolutes, but absolutes that live somewhere in the sky, and you cant see.
12. Ebony Jackson on December 19th, 2008 3:58 pm 12

    THANK YOU PYRRHO!!

    Here is something else that gets up my nose.

    When people place death notices in the paper, the deceased is nearly always portrayed as having “passed away”.

    In fact they have died…they haven’t gone anywhere.

    The death event means the end of life…it happens to all living organisms and is not reserved as a means of separating those who hold religious beliefs, from those who don’t.

    Christianity, Islam, or any other doctrine, does not mean anyone facing death, will get special treatment during the dying process.

    Until there is documented scientific argument supporting evidence a deceased human… who actually has grown angel wings, heard violins & harps or experienced the “pearly gates”…and they were not known to be mentally deficient, and so on.

    We all die…despite our belief system..so GET WITH THE PROGRAM!!

    .
13. Pyrrho on December 19th, 2008 9:39 pm 13

    We are on the same tram, Ebony.
    My personal favorite euphemism comes courtesy of the Salvos. I remember reading in a “War Cry” (the salvo’s newspaper thingy) that members were “Promoted to glory”
    Hell of a way to climb the corporate latter in that outfit.

    We all know what its like to be dead. We’ve been there.
    How was it for you for the past 13.7 billion years before your birth?
    I cant seem to recall any highlights.

    The thing that I really find offensive and just downright stupid, is the notion that you cant live a good and wholesome life without faith.
    That notion is completely intellectually bankrupt.
14. Ebony Jackson on December 20th, 2008 4:10 pm 14

    I am absolutely clear about my one and only life Pyrrho…it would kill me if I had to do it over again…this girl is not a fan..however I do belong to suckers anonymous, a bit like a rock band…without the band.

    I mean…seriously, you would need rocks in your head, big time.
    Enough already!

    As for living a life without faith…never needed it as a crutch.
    Never been busted for a crime…murder (OK, wanting to is not the same as doing)… don’t beat up old people..and not into kidnapping babies or nicking a lolly at the checkout.

    Having a life without brain washing from godbotheres inc., has to be living without excess baggage.
15. ptygmatic on December 24th, 2008 6:37 pm 15

    Jim, you stated “In fact, those of no religion are the largest mass murderers in history.”

    I assume, like most christians, you are refering to Stalin and Hilter?

    Well, if you did not already know, both these people were born into devout religious families, and raised, and educated as such until their late teens. Hitler was born into a Roman Catholic family, Stalin was Russian Orthodox. As for whether they were true atheists into adulthood…. noone really knows.
16. Alistair on December 24th, 2008 7:52 pm 16

    I can’t think of any “great” leader who claimed to be of no religion. I’ve just finished reading about Genghis Khan and he was pagan. I don’t think that proves anything though.

    Superficially, Christianity and Buddhism should be the most peaceful faiths in the world.
17. Pyrrho on December 24th, 2008 9:07 pm 17

    By definition as a leader of thought and change, Karl Marks would have to be one very noticeable atheist leader.
    In 1844, Karl Marx wrote in his Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right:
    “”Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.”
    When you read the fine print, Markism and Christianity have a few commonalities. ie all men are equal.
    Don’t blame Marks for the evils of communism. He was a radical and original thinker whose philosophies were hijacked by psychopaths.

    Though what I think that Jim means when he says leader, is the bloke that sits on the horse at the front, or shouts at the masses from a podium.
18. Alistair on December 24th, 2008 9:19 pm 18

    Pyrrho, I think you mean “Marx” rather than “Marks” (got it right once).

    He wasn’t really a leader, in the sense that he never governed, nor stood at the head of an army. He was more a philosopher.

    Yes, Marxism and Christianity have common elements. Except Marxism was unforgiving.
19. Pyrrho on December 25th, 2008 10:35 pm 19

    No, I meant Karl Marks, my neighbor. He worked at the Tarpeena mill.
    D’oh!!
    You are of course correct. Late night brain lock.
    True, he never lead any armies ( I did add a caveat in the first sentence).

    Thought the Christians may profess forgiveness on paper, I don’t think they are anymore inclined towards it in actuality than any other group.
20. Alistair on December 26th, 2008 6:47 pm 20

    I agree Christians are no more inclined to forgiveness than other groups, but it is part of the theology, unlike the philosophy of Marxism.
21. Pyrrho on December 26th, 2008 7:43 pm 21

    Forgiveness ( of sin) is a theistic concept, and thus has no value in a secular philosophy.
22. Ebony Jackson on December 27th, 2008 4:20 pm 22

    Aristotle also declared that people are motivated to seek pleasure and avoid pain.

    Other ancient Greek philosophers contributed to this theory. Around 400 BCE, Democritus suggested that we could think of behaviour in terms of body and mind.
    He pointed out that our behaviour is influenced by external stimulation. Democritus was one of the first to raise the question of whether there is free will or free choice.

    Putting it another way, where do the influences of others and our “real selves” begin?
    Plato (ca. 427-347 BCE) was a disciple of the great philosopher Socrates. He recorded Socrates advice to “Know thyself”.

    Socrates claimed that we could not attain reliable self-knowledge through our senses because the senses do not mirror reality.

    Because the senses provide imperfect knowledge, Socrates suggested we should rely on processes such as rational thought and introspection – (careful examination of one’s own thoughts and emotions) – to achieve self-knowledge.

    He also pointed out that people are social creatures who influence one another.
23. Jade on December 27th, 2008 5:08 pm 23

    Poor Mr Rathus did not go to all that trouble to write Psychology text for people not to cite his work

    Jade
24. Ebony Jackson on December 28th, 2008 5:54 pm 24

    oops.
    will make sure not to offend significant others next time.

    I have great respect for many of our historical thinkers and contributers. Sometimes we need to be reminded about these great people and their achievements.
    With the tools of knowledge we are able to learn forgiveness, and most importantly the flaws that make us human.
25. Hamud Sokorow on January 18th, 2009 3:14 pm 25

    There is controversy among Muslims over whether death by stoning is even a punishment sanctioned by Islamic law. But I uphold the harshness meted out for the crime of adultery in Islamic law, even if the punishment is only 100 lashes and not stoning. One of the principal foundations of society is the family, and adultery utterly decimates the family. Once the family is destroyed, the destruction of society soon follows.

    Ubada b. as-Samit reported: Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Receive (teaching) from me, receive (teaching) from me. Allah has ordained a way for those (women). When an unmarried male commits adultery with an unmarried female (they should receive) one hundred lashes and banishment for one year. And in case of married male committing adultery with a married female, they shall receive one hundred lashes and be stoned to death.
26. Pyrrho on January 18th, 2009 5:33 pm 26

    ‘Only’ 100 lashes.
    Questions this raises.

    1) Is the punishment equal for both male and female adulterers?
    2) With what are they lashed?
    3) The last scenario, married male committing adultery with a married female, attracts one hundred lashes and be stoned to death.
    Can you change the order of that?
    4) Why this anachronistic medievalism still even discussed as an option, let alone why it is committed in the name of alleged peace loving deities?

    In the name of unitarianism, I also ask why some people think it necessary to worship an alleged victim of torture, mutilation, and execution by the Romans, then feel the need to cannibalize this victims flesh and blood?

    This is the stuff of nightmares.
    And they teach it to children. “No Victoria, there is no Santa, but all the rest of it is real.”
27. Ebony Jackson on January 18th, 2009 5:56 pm 27

    I really don’t understand such extreme views and am thankful to be living in a country like Australia.

    I am also glad not to belong to any religious doctrine that worships any leader, figure, of any religious faith or belief that brainwashes humanity to the extent where human life is not valued or respected.

    This makes me very comfortable in my own headspace….a place where there is no belief in a God to confuse me.
28. pete on January 27th, 2009 10:15 am 28

    Migrant youth are not the problem. They are not even 1% but it is the media that makes us feel the are the problem. The real problem is the vast majority of Aussie young men and women in low socio-economic areas who are hand out dependent and have been taught to behave like they do from their parents and grandparents. They are now the 3rd generation of major social issues and the cycle will contiune. They have been set up to fail form the moment they were born and these people are the both the perpertrators and victims of these anti-social type of crimes. Ironically these bogun people who go around on Australia day beating up ethnic groups have actually caused the rise in immigration in Australia. As if these bogun welfare dependant people got themselves a job then we would not have a skills shortage and would not need to bring in so many overseas workers. I am all for a multi cultural Australia and the real war should not be declared on new arrivals but on these pockets of Aussie centrelink scum who are ignorant and do not give the rest of Australia a good name.

We welcome your comments on this story. Comments are submitted for possible publication on the condition that they may be edited. We require a working email address - not for publication, but for verification.