respect?

[minux]

Trying to make sense of the opinions of those who believe she deserves her punishment.

Does she deserve it for the crime she committed of for breaking a law?

The law that was broken appears to relate to her allowing herself to been seen publicly without a piece of headwear and exposing her own head with a haircut of her choice.

So either those in favour of her punishment believe that as a woman, not wearing a piece of headwear or exposing a shaven head in public deserves to be punished by spending a year in jail and receiving 90 lashes of a whip

Or

If they do not believe the law is reasonable they believe that she should be punished for breaking the law, not the actual crime itself. If so they see that the imperative is laws not be broken no matter what they are, as opposed to the actual crimes being punished?

Has anyone actually said the punishment is fair?

I think people are saying the punishment is according to their laws...she broke the laws and as such has to deal with it.

I am not sure what exactly you are trying to twist in to peoples words.

[DAKSTER]

i just did a bit of reading on the hijab itself and (i know its a bit of a rough source) wikipedia says

The Arabic word literally means curtain or cover (noun). Most Islamic legal systems define this type of modest dressing as covering everything except the face and hands in public.[1][2] According to Islamic scholarship, hijab is given the wider meaning of modesty, privacy, and morality;[3] the words for a headscarf or veil used in the Qur'an are khimār (خمار) and jilbaab (جلباب), not hijab. Still another definition is metaphysical, where al-hijab refers to "the veil which separates man or the world from God."[2]

so by this rational she is being charged with choosing to relinquish her privacy, not being modest and having a different view on morals,

if she doesn't want her privacy that her choice, same as her level of modesty, and this whole debate is because we all have view of where to draw the line on our morals.
the problem i have is that the hijab is a religious symbol and this woman is peing perscuted over her use (or lack there of) of it.
it's like us being persecuted for not wearing a cross or not saying grace before we eat as christianity is the largest praticed religion in australia, and this kind religion based enforcment is walking the road that leads to genocide. and lets not fool ourselvs, that is exactly what we see on the news each night. there was an austrian bloke once that tried this sort of thing, and the world steped in despite the laws of his country saying he was ok to do it at the time.
so do i think a foreign country needs to step in... i'm in 2 minds one says yes if for no other reason than to protect someones right to choose their religion and their level of involvment within it and the other says no, a country needs to learn, evolve and advance on their own under a democratic system which allows the people to decide what is best for them.
in saying all that
yes she broke the law (probably knowingly and knowing of the concequences) and will punished for it.
do i think the punishment befits the crime? hell no, of course its barbaric.
i would suggest people have a read over this as well

Just War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

i do feel it is relevent as certain choises should be considered an "inalienable right" especially those surounding religion and they should be protected even if it means interfering in overseas matters.

There are numerous versions of Islam. Its like the Bible, different groups interpret it in different ways - usually to suit their own needs or wishes.

Whilst I have heard many Islamic woman speak on the hijab, and most say its a matter of choice, I have heard some say that it is required. Its a matter of how you interpret the Koran, I suspect... the Bible has the same options.. "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" and "forgive thy neighbour" come immediately to mind.

Her government has chosen to take the less palatable option. OK, its not a democracy. Democracies are born when the people rise to take control. They cant be created by force.

I can quote as many instances of failed attempts to do this as you like, but lets start with Afghanistan and Iraq. Just walking into a country and shooting the existing government does not create a democracy. You need a grass root approach. The people in the country have to demand and create the democracy, or all you get is a dead government and an opportunity for the next despot to grab a seat.

Its been proven so many times, you cant just walk into a country and change its culture, any more than you can walk into a schoolyard and stop bullying. The people need to do it themselves, big brother cant step in and protect them from every bully, because big brother has to be elsewhere too.

War is never an answer, unless its a civil war where the winners actually get what they wanted rather than what some other country assumes they want.

[minux]

There are numerous versions of Islam. Its like the Bible, different groups interpret it in different ways - usually to suit their own needs or wishes.

There is only one version of the bible just like there is only one version of the Koran. There are variables of the bible but the koran is pretty strict in that there is really only 1 version.

[Crisis63]

There is only one version of the bible just like there is only one version of the Koran. There are variables of the bible but the koran is pretty strict in that there is really only 1 version.

You may want to read what he said.

[Crisis63]

Has anyone actually said the punishment is fair?

I think people are saying the punishment is according to their laws...she broke the laws and as such has to deal with it.

I am not sure what exactly you are trying to twist in to peoples words.

Firstly the word “fair” is nowhere to be seen in my post.

Secondly there was a question mark at the end of the paragraph implying a question.

Leaving aside the superficially obvious (although there are now conflicting stories as to whether she actually broke one of their laws) notion that one who breaks a law and is caught will be held to account, the question I am asking goes beyond that to the question of the rationale of those who have posted their views here.
In your opinion “she broke the laws and as such has to deal with it.” Again leaving the rather simple logic applied to come to such a conclusion, does this mean you agree with a law that sentences a woman to jail and to be physically assaulted for not wearing a head dress and exposing her shaven head in public?

[DAKSTER]

There is only one version of the bible just like there is only one version of the Koran. There are variables of the bible but the koran is pretty strict in that there is really only 1 version.

Havent made any comment on how many versions of the Bible or the Koran exist actually.

You did though, first you said there is only one version of the Bible then you said there are variables ( I assume you mean variations? ) of the Bible but only 1 Koran. So there is only one Bible or more than one variation?

I said there are many variations on how they are interpreted. I'd make a list of various religions or cultures that base themselves on either book but have completely different interpretations of them, but its just too long a list.

[minux]

Havent made any comment on how many versions of the Bible or the Koran exist actually.

You did though, first you said there is only one version of the Bible then you said there are variables ( I assume you mean variations? ) of the Bible but only 1 Koran. So there is only one Bible or more than one variation?

I said there are many variations on how they are interpreted. I'd make a list of various religions or cultures that base themselves on either book but have completely different interpretations of them, but its just too long a list.

Yep, my bad, been running on empty and misread and miskeying words.

[Not_An_Abba_Fan]

Firstly the word “fair” is nowhere to be seen in my post.

Secondly there was a question mark at the end of the paragraph implying a question.

Leaving aside the superficially obvious (although there are now conflicting stories as to whether she actually broke one of their laws) notion that one who breaks a law and is caught will be held to account, the question I am asking goes beyond that to the question of the rationale of those who have posted their views here.
In your opinion “she broke the laws and as such has to deal with it.” Again leaving the rather simple logic applied to come to such a conclusion, does this mean you agree with a law that sentences a woman to jail and to be physically assaulted for not wearing a head dress and exposing her shaven head in public?

Stating that I believe she has to deal with the consequences of her actions in her own country isn't the same as agreeing with the type or severity of the punishment. It comes down to her knowingly breaking her country's laws and having to suffer the consequences of that. Whether or not I agree with the punishment is irrelevant.

On that note, I didn't vote in their poll because the wording of the choices are such that to stir public emotion by the results.

[Malcolm123]

yeah, you are saying right dear, thanks for info and sharing....

[ClairBear]

yeah, you are saying right dear, thanks for info and sharing....

Who are you referring to? Do you know how to use the quote system?

[Kieran263]

To the original post. When islam comes out of the dark ages, maybe the countries which are governed
by it's backward laws will be able to step into the first world. I mean seriously, she starred in a film.
I'm all up for people having a religion, but when it causes something as abhorrent as this all I can say is.
Islam, ####'s ####ed. Seriously, #### that, are they all retarded or is it just all of the inbreeding and sand?

[hi_ryder]

looks like in iran artistic expression dosent trump islamic law. (note to to self dont holiday in iran) oh yea its also a dry country

[Not_An_Abba_Fan]

To the original post. When islam comes out of the dark ages, maybe the countries which are governed
by it's backward laws will be able to step into the first world. I mean seriously, she starred in a film.
I'm all up for people having a religion, but when it causes something as abhorrent as this all I can say is.
Islam, c**t's f**ked. Seriously, f**k that, are they all retarded or is it just all of the inbreeding and sand?

Judgemental much?

You obviously don't have any respect for other cultures or their beliefs. Nice attitude.

[Kieran263]

Abba, I have immense respect for other cultures, but when imaginary stories written by uneducated people dictate how
people run their lives to the point of them blindly following ridiculous laws that de-humanise people for the smallest of
breaches then I have no respect for that religion, or the countries who follow it to that extent.

[DAKSTER]

To the original post. When islam comes out of the dark ages, maybe the countries which are governed
by it's backward laws will be able to step into the first world. I mean seriously, she starred in a film.
I'm all up for people having a religion, but when it causes something as abhorrent as this all I can say is.
Islam, c**t's f**ked. Seriously, f**k that, are they all retarded or is it just all of the inbreeding and sand?

Islam isnt the problem here. The problem is that just like any other society, there are some people that are more intelligent, forceful, cruel, violent, cunning or whatever it takes to rise to the top.

In Australia, they become bank CEO's, award themselves ridiculous rates of pay, and live the good life. In Iran, they become religious leaders and twist the religion to suit whatever their own needs and ambitions are instead.

You cant blame the religion for the despots that control their country by using that religion as a tool, any more than you can blame the actions of the account holders of the bank which the CEO controls.

Your last line is bordering on illegal. Racial vilification to the max, you are lucky it wasnt aimed at an individual. Retarded, inbreeding, sand? Nothing you say will have any further relevance to me after that effort. Mods need to warn you, thats crossing the line.

[Kieran263]

Not once did I mention race. While my comments may be quite harsh, it can't be seen as racial vilification.
It can only be seen as religious vilification and, whilst borderline illegal, merely my opinion.
I'll be happy for a mod to give me a warning. But would you have reacted differently if I had been vilifying christianity?

[Crisis63]

To the original post. When islam comes out of the dark ages, maybe the countries which are governed
by it's backward laws will be able to step into the first world. I mean seriously, she starred in a film.
I'm all up for people having a religion, but when it causes something as abhorrent as this all I can say is.
Islam, c**t's f**ked. Seriously, f**k that, are they all retarded or is it just all of the inbreeding and sand?

Its religion. It was invented, mainly by men, to use to control people. It has been used by most cultures and races through time to do just that. “Do what we want you to” under the pretense that it is the word of some supreme force “or you will be punished and tormented beyond death”. Of course “if you comply with all the things we tell you to you will live eternally in peace and joy”. Doesn’t everyone want that?
Seriously….

[DAKSTER]

I totally agree with you on the subject of the easter bunny, the tooth fairy, santa claus and god.. they are all in the same basket in my view.

However, if other people choose to believe in a mystical figure, thats their business and I have no interest in interfering.

Christianity, Islam, you name it, it makes no difference. What you have is an all powerful leader, his/her sycophants, and a bunch of followers. The followers cant be blamed, its the leaders that are a problem. In most cases, people choose to believe in a deity because they find some kind of personal peace within those beliefs. I support this, for those that want to choose that road.

In Islam particularly, its not a religion thats common amongst wealthy countries. In wealthy countries, the cunning and industrious can rise to the top politically and financially. In poorer countries, its easier for them to prey on the superstitions of the believers, so thats what they do.

Religions are in general a harbinger of peace in theory. Its a shame most religious leaders, including among those the leaders of the largest Christian nations, seem to think war is a good way to make peace.

Christianity has done far worse than Islam throughout history. The Crusades for instance, or any war that big brother USA chooses to start, are all based on forcing their own beliefs and values onto others. Again though, thats not individuals, thats the hierarchy at work. Most Americans dont want to go to war.. most Islamics just want to lead a quiet life without being spat at.

[Zeussy]

I had a whole bunch of posts to comment on before reading all the pages in this thread, but now all I can muster up is LOL.

####ing seriously, how has this thread gone on for so long?

Law was broken, punishment dealt, the end.
Who gives a #### who agree's with it, 99.99999999% of Australians would agree its barbaric, and shouldn't be law etc..

But that really is not the question you should be asking; The question should be "Is flaunting the law, producing it and selling it oversea's, then returning home, only to be punished for the laws that you broke whilst filming the breaking of said laws reasonable or not..?"

Question: If I ripped skids in front of Parliament House, then went over to **insert foreign country here** published it, sold it, then the video then went viral, was watched worldwide, by Australia and our Government, then I returned home, is it OK that I should be charged with some sort of 'Hoon' related laws?

Answer: #### yes, there is proof that 'Hoon' related laws were broken in Australia, by an Australian.

[DAKSTER]

Not once did I mention race. While my comments may be quite harsh, it can't be seen as racial vilification.
It can only be seen as religious vilification and, whilst borderline illegal, merely my opinion.
I'll be happy for a mod to give me a warning. But would you have reacted differently if I had been vilifying christianity?

Yes sorry, you didnt state race. And on that note, maybe you didnt break any laws.. is there a religious vilification law? Probably not.. although the reference to sand would remove Indonesia (the worlds largest Islamic country) and many other Islamic countries.. you have pretty much nailed it down to the middle east and the gulf states.

Would I have reacted differently? NO. I can be totally impartial here, I believe in evolution, not fairy tales... this kind of stuff 'Islam, ####'s ####ed. Seriously, #### that, are they all retarded or is it just all of the inbreeding and sand? ' has nothing to do with religion. Its an attack on a bunch of individuals that you dont know, and a particularly nasty one.

Such attacks are not acceptable in THIS country. How do you get to criticise other people when you dont appear to have any boundaries of your own?

I dont give a crap where you come from or what language you speak. If you speak english to me, I will give you a polite response, and if you dont, I wont be able to so I will just smile and shrug my shoulders.

[DAKSTER]

I had a whole bunch of posts to comment on before reading all the pages in this thread, but now all I can muster up is LOL.

####ing seriously, how has this thread gone on for so long?

Law was broken, punishment dealt, the end.
Who gives a #### who agree's with it, 99.99999999% of Australians would agree its barbaric, and shouldn't be law etc..

But that really is not the question you should be asking; The question should be "Is flaunting the law, producing it and selling it oversea's, then returning home, only to be punished for the laws that you broke whilst filming the breaking of said laws reasonable or not..?"

Question: If I ripped skids in front of Parliament House, then went over to **insert foreign country here** published it, sold it, then the video then went viral, was watched worldwide, by Australia and our Government, then I returned home, is it OK that I should be charged with some sort of 'Hoon' related laws?

Answer: #### yes, there is proof that 'Hoon' related laws were broken in Australia, by an Australian.

Hate to be the devils advocate here, but reports are that she didnt actually break any of her own state or religious laws, in which case she certainly has my sympathy. Doesn't mean we can or should do anything about it though, Iran is not our country and their legal system is not ours to interfere with.

[GRPABT1]

Re, the argument that she knew the law and chose to break it knowing the consequences: Did anyone stop to think that perhaps she has no choice but to live there and be subjected to those abhorrent, barbaric, backward, ancient, outdated rules? I imagine in this day and age of easy access to social media, international news and entertainment etc that one would find it very hard to resist the urge to enjoy such freedoms as we take for granted. Perhaps her financial situation does not extend to the option of leaving for a more enjoyable life elsewhere free of the restrictions enforced by the place she was born into without choice. Place yourself in her shoes and it's alot easier to sympathise with her.

Their laws are ####ed to the point where it's obviously pointless in even arguing in their defense. Perhaps the argument of her knowingly and willingly breaking them is not so black and white as to say she had a choice to break them or not. I personally don't think a reasonable person would have any other choice but to disregard such laws when they've been unavoidably thrust upon you. A choice is something you make between one thing and any number of reasonable alternatives, the alternative being; leave if you don't agree with law. It may not have been in her power to leave so really their was no alternative. Hence no I don't think she chose to break the law and receive the consequences. There was no other choice.

So the argument then falls to wether it is reasonable or not to expect someone to live a life by cruel and unfair laws and expectations, and hence not break them. I doubt anyone (short of die hard islamic's) would agree that someone should willfully wave their basic moral, human rights just because of the fact they were born in a certain place and into a certain society.

[ucwepn]

They have stricter punishments than us so an adjustment is necessary when travelling between other countries and our own, before travelling to such a country I'm sure any normal person would do research on said country not just buy a ticket then fly there and plead ingnorance. serves them right if they broke the law of the land.