Woman to be stoned to death in Iran for adultery

[Hitman]

I am going to read this whole thread properly later as I have only read a few posts so far but wanted to reply first:

I laugh when people say we should go in and stop them doing all these things, however people here moan when foreigners come and change even little things. :rolleyes:
Its their country and their laws, people here don't like others coming here, so what right does UK have to go in their country and stop them?

Foreigners changing our language and acquiring our shops is NOT on the same level as stoning a women to death... I hope you realise what I mean.

[Tintinnabulate]

Foreigners changing our language and acquiring our shops is NOT on the same level as stoning a women to death... I hope you realise what I mean.

Didn't realise England was being changed ...
And tbh if people here fail to run a shop and a foreigner buys it off them and makes it a success, it clearly benefits the economy here.

People here don't like anything being changed by foreigners, so they shouldn't try and change things in other countries. Iraq is a good example of this.

[Accipiter]

The people who moan here about foreigners taking jobs are blind and usually don't fully understand. I don't have a problem with it as they fill the jobs we don't want. Its the ones who live off our sleezy benefits that piss me off.

But bringing a country forward to the standard of the modern world is not wrong.

[Hitman]

Didn't realise England was being changed ...
And tbh if people here fail to run a shop and a foreigner buys it off them and makes it a success, it clearly benefits the economy here.

People here don't like anything being changed by foreigners, so they shouldn't try and change things in other countries. Iraq is a good example of this.

...however people here moan when foreigners come and change even little things.

They change little things, you even wrote it in your post... regardless of if they change things or not. If the UK had absurd laws where adultery was punishable by death by stoning then I would welcome the change. Do you not think these people living under fear and oppression of their government want to be free?

We are not asking Iran to allow porn films and to open McDonalds everywhere, those are small cultural things which are what you're saying or suggesting foreigners do here (or at the very least saying what others give as an example). We are wanting them to not commit torture to their citizens.

If you agree with them torturing people then you're barbaric. If you agree that torture should not be stopped worldwide then you're barbaric. We do not want to and are not making them change every little thing - we simply don't want them to commit torture.

Voiceover. is spot on.

[Eckuii]

The British government are increasing their pressure because its what America would want them to do. We are just like the little goat and America is the goat herder. We don't invade Zimbawbe because they provide billions of dollars and pounds in Diamonds all across the world even though their human rights is absolutely terrible.
Nobody challenges China because they are a developing country and although their GDP is unlikely to ever be as high as America's, they are still bigger than America is terms of output to countries. A lot of countries have alliance to China that even America couldn't handle. So they just let them crack on with their terrible human rights.

Then their is Iran, a country who is already being threatened by Isreal and America. Clearly they have a terrible human rights and America don't like them because they are on the verge of producing nuclear weapons. So along come Britain who also put the pressure on them becuase they are a smaller nation.

To me it feels like the Government is following America's lead on everything with a country they disagree with. It feels like they are provoking the media in to reporting issues like this, so that if America want to go to war with Iran, the British public and government will just role over and follow suit like they did in Iraq and Afghanistan. Although it isn't acceptable to stone the woman to death, why don't Britain and America remember that 200 year ago they were the world leaders in slavery. Where was their morals then?

I think it should also be stated America wasn't so keen to follow Britain in to World War 2 even though they provided thousands of bombs and equipment for which we have only just finished paying. Why don't Britain just get a backbone.

[HotelUser]

Of course you're absolutely correct, what they believe is not important. Why does this "have" to be done? I'm sure you don't agree when they suggest that it's their duty to spread the teachings and laws of Islam to the entire world. You talk of flawed arguments and then come out with this, dear me.

There is, disregarding cultural differences, a significant difference between forcing a religion, which includes beliefs, rituals and lifestyles upon someone compared to fighting for people to have fair rights which includes the same freedoms people--not just of our modern culture--have strived for for generations and generations. You're comparing religion to be on par with the basic rights and freedoms a person should get. Not only is that argument flawed, but the comparison is utterly ridiculous.

Yes it is if that's not what they as a nation believe in

You should have said, "if that's not what they as men of a nation believe in." Female suicide rates in Afganhistan because of the Taliban have been incredibly high. The culture of which a person belongs to CANNOT undermine the rights that person should be entitled to. The person should first be entitled to those rights and then through those rights be allowed to follow a lifestyle they choose to. By not giving them these basic human rights you're actually forcing a lifestyle upon them.

Yes it is for everyone who makes a profit out of it or would otherwise be without certain items of such production

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard of in my entire life. We should allow sweatshops to continue because we benefit from them? That's what we're doing but you're not exactly at the pinnacle of corporate America. If you genuinely think this then I wont win this argument. Not because I'm not right, but because you have such a foolish perspective that you're beyond reason of logic

"Fair" is an ambiguous term at any time, and no I will not get out of this thread just for defending a view - if you're going to believe in something so ridiculous as global equality then try accepting freedom of opinion.

I do accept the freedom of opinion and I will accept your opinion and anyone else's opinion so long as they can defend the reasons as to why they've come to their opinion. You have failed to specify logical reasons as to why benefits of death by stoning outweigh the negatives of how much a person is going to suffer and be tortured by being hit with rocks until they die.

I agree that education is important, but absolute freedom of choice does impeach on various aspects of all cultures and lifestyles worldwide.

They should have the freedom and rights to choose if they want education, and before they make that decision they should know about the benefits of what an education will do for them.

Iran's suicide ranking is currently the 98th highest in the world. By contrast, the UK are at 66, US at 41 and Canada at 37. Maybe Iran should invade us to save us from our lives "sucking"? Good argument there.

As I already said above and as you've probably assumed, I was referring to the suicide rates of woman in Afganhistan after the Taliban took control.

[Tintinnabulate]

They change little things, you even wrote it in your post... regardless of if they change things or not. If the UK had absurd laws where adultery was punishable by death by stoning then I would welcome the change. Do you not think these people living under fear and oppression of their government want to be free?

We are not asking Iran to allow porn films and to open McDonalds everywhere, those are small cultural things which are what you're saying or suggesting foreigners do here (or at the very least saying what others give as an example). We are wanting them to not commit torture to their citizens.

If you agree with them torturing people then you're barbaric. If you agree that torture should not be stopped worldwide then you're barbaric. We do not want to and are not making them change every little thing - we simply don't want them to commit torture.

Voiceover. is spot on.

Its their culture, its their laws. No I hate torture and I hate the death penalty. In China you can be executed for Tax Fraud - why doesn't this moral country go in and change that?
Maybe their government doesn't want the wives to cheat on husbands and vice versa, its their law, their culture. We don't agree with it, but they don't agree with the way most women dress here - do you see them coming here and asking you to change the way you dress? No.
To me it looks like the U.K. likes to stick its nose in every countries business to assert its authority.

The British government are increasing their pressure because its what America would want them to do. We are just like the little goat and America is the goat herder. We don't invade Zimbawbe because they provide billions of dollars and pounds in Diamonds all across the world even though their human rights is absolutely terrible.
Nobody challenges China because they are a developing country and although their GDP is unlikely to ever be as high as America's, they are still bigger than America is terms of output to countries. A lot of countries have alliance to China that even America couldn't handle. So they just let them crack on with their terrible human rights.

Then their is Iran, a country who is already being threatened by Isreal and America. Clearly they have a terrible human rights and America don't like them because they are on the verge of producing nuclear weapons. So along come Britain who also put the pressure on them becuase they are a smaller nation.

To me it feels like the Government is following America's lead on everything with a country they disagree with. It feels like they are provoking the media in to reporting issues like this, so that if America want to go to war with Iran, the British public and government will just role over and follow suit like they did in Iraq and Afghanistan. Although it isn't acceptable to stone the woman to death, why don't Britain and America remember that 200 year ago they were the world leaders in slavery. Where was their morals then?

I think it should also be stated America wasn't so keen to follow Britain in to World War 2 even though they provided thousands of bombs and equipment for which we have only just finished paying. Why don't Britain just get a backbone.

Excellent post. I agree with pretty much all of it. England invaded half the world, took over so much gold etc, but I guess it was 200 years ago so it doesn't matter :rolleyes: +rep
One more thing I absolutely hate, England cut down all its forests and tress to make roads, buildings etc so it can develop. However, it forces countries in Africa not to due to Global Warming. So England quickly gets rid of its trees etc, then forces other countries not to - meaning they cannot develop etc. Pathetic.

[Hitman]

Its their culture, its their laws. No I hate torture and I hate the death penalty. In China you can be executed for Tax Fraud - why doesn't this moral country go in and change that?
Maybe their government doesn't want the wives to cheat on husbands and vice versa, its their law, their culture. We don't agree with it, but they don't agree with the way most women dress here - do you see them coming here and asking you to change the way you dress? No.
To me it looks like the U.K. likes to stick its nose in every countries business to assert its authority.

It's-not-quite-clicking-is-it?

You give examples of how these people wouldn't like the way women dress in the UK and how they don't come and change it - this is a tiny thing. How people dress does not include any pain or hurt. Being stoned to death cannot be compared to clothes.

If we wanted them to change how they walked or what hair styles they had then YES, it would be an absolute joke and we'd be idiots. But this is not about clothes, or trivial things, this is about TORTURE and death. I'm not familiar with the Chinese death penalty, but I assume it's not being stoned to death or some other gruesome act of violence.

I'm not saying the UK should stick its nose it at everything, these are just my opinions that we shouldn't allow torture to occur, just like people don't want racism in the world, an violence etc. The sad truth is that none of these things will probably ever be eradicated, but fighting against them can reduce occurrences. If a country wants to punish somebody for picking their nose, then go ahead, but to torture them for a crime is not right.

[Tintinnabulate]

It's-not-quite-clicking-is-it?

You give examples of how these people wouldn't like the way women dress in the UK and how they don't come and change it - this is a tiny thing. How people dress does not include any pain or hurt. Being stoned to death cannot be compared to clothes.

If we wanted them to change how they walked or what hair styles they had then YES, it would be an absolute joke and we'd be idiots. But this is not about clothes, or trivial things, this is about TORTURE and death. I'm not familiar with the Chinese death penalty, but I assume it's not being stoned to death or some other gruesome act of violence.

I'm not saying the UK should stick its nose it at everything, these are just my opinions that we shouldn't allow torture to occur, just like people don't want racism in the world, an violence etc. The sad truth is that none of these things will probably ever be eradicated, but fighting against them can reduce occurrences. If a country wants to punish somebody for picking their nose, then go ahead, but to torture them for a crime is not right.

What about sticking their nose in the African Forest bit?

[FlyingJesus]

There is, disregarding cultural differences, a significant difference between forcing a religion, which includes beliefs, rituals and lifestyles upon someone compared to fighting for people to have fair rights which includes the same freedoms people--not just of our modern culture--have strived for for generations and generations. You're comparing religion to be on par with the basic rights and freedoms a person should get. Not only is that argument flawed, but the comparison is utterly ridiculous.

You are clearly not aware of the fact that most of what not only makes up the basis of our laws but also our day to day morals is religion. We are no longer a country made to observe any religion we don't want to, but the laws that have religious foundations still remain and we are still taught mainly Christian morals, whether its done in a Christian way or under the name of basic ethics. It may well be tough out there but that's what they "for generations and generations" have worked for and sustained. You're still confusing your ideas of what is right and wrong with universal fact.

You should have said, "if that's not what they as men of a nation believe in." Female suicide rates in Afganhistan because of the Taliban have been incredibly high. The culture of which a person belongs to CANNOT undermine the rights that person should be entitled to. The person should first be entitled to those rights and then through those rights be allowed to follow a lifestyle they choose to. By not giving them these basic human rights you're actually forcing a lifestyle upon them.

Their religious law says otherwise, and as that's what they believe that's the ethical code they follow. Not everyone values the same things in the same way and you cannot force them to accept other methods just like I'm sure they couldn't force you to follow their ways. To them, allowing sacreligious practises to take place is entirely unacceptable, to the same degree that you detest the idea of torture.

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard of in my entire life. We should allow sweatshops to continue because we benefit from them? That's what we're doing but you're not exactly at the pinnacle of corporate America. If you genuinely think this then I wont win this argument. Not because I'm not right, but because you have such a foolish perspective that you're beyond reason of logic

I don't believe you understand the difference between facts and opinions properly. I did not say that I think sweatshops are a good thing, I said that shutting them all down would be unfair to some peoples' way of living. If no-one profited from it they wouldn't exist, so clearly getting rid of them would diminish someone's profits, thus hindering their current way of life. Again, I'm not trying to justify sweatshops, this is simply logical fact. Speaking of which, such an opinion would (as I've just shown) not be illogical, so you seem not to understand logic either. The correct phrasing for you in that instance should have been simply that you do not agree with it on a moral basis - as I keep mentioning though, your morals do not necessarily mean universal law.

I do accept the freedom of opinion and I will accept your opinion and anyone else's opinion so long as they can defend the reasons as to why they've come to their opinion. You have failed to specify logical reasons as to why benefits of death by stoning outweigh the negatives of how much a person is going to suffer and be tortured by being hit with rocks until they die.

I've done no such thing, you're just using the wrong words again - you not agreeing with it does not make it illogical. It does logically follow that a country which abides by such laws should carry out the punishment deemed fit by its legal system. However if you really need a utilitarian reason: when any law isn't properly acted on it weakens the entire structure of the system and affects the populace as a whole, rather than affecting just those involved as is the case when it goes as it is written that it should.

As I already said above and as you've probably assumed, I was referring to the suicide rates of woman in Afganhistan after the Taliban took control.

...In a discussion about Iran. I don't have any figures for Afghanistan and won't pretend to, but it's a moot point considering it's not the same topic.