Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Is this justice or religious non-sense?
Iran's judiciary has postponed the blinding of a man as punishment for throwing acid in the face of a young woman in 2004, after she rejected his offer of marriage. The delay came in the face of mounting outcry both inside Iran and in the West over the sentencing, which is permissible under qesas, a principle of Islamic law allowing victims analogous retribution for violent crimes.
http://news.yahoo.com...l_time/08599207152900
http://news.yahoo.com...l_time/08599207152900
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Cowtipper. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
It makes the State no better than the criminal who performed the original act. Worst in fact because individuals can have all sorts of mental problems, the State deliberately sanctions punishments. Such behaviour shouts, "barbarism" to the world, and merely shows that some groups of humanity have not progressed as far as others.
You are right Old-Geezer but what do you mean by the // groups of humanity have not progressed as far as others. // Who are the Others ? Is this some elite superior to the general populous in knowledge and wisdom . I assume you include yourself as one of the Others.
The public in general want much tougher sentences especially for murder and brutal crimes but you imply they are the group who have not reached the level of the Others.
The public in general want much tougher sentences especially for murder and brutal crimes but you imply they are the group who have not reached the level of the Others.
"Others" would be those cultures that do not spout this sort of "eye for an eye" nonsense, or who, as a culture do not feel that killing or maiming of one of their own is ok because the criminal did it first, so it is ok for society to act at the same level.
The reference was not being applied to individuals since no large group is going to have everyone agreeing.
Sorry was that not self evident? I assumed it was. But there again I have been told in the past that I'm not always clear.
The reference was not being applied to individuals since no large group is going to have everyone agreeing.
Sorry was that not self evident? I assumed it was. But there again I have been told in the past that I'm not always clear.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.