Whipped For Loving..

[fender62]

religion of peace..mmm the face of islam you do not see on bbc, i wonder why..guess trump is more news worthy, considered a racist..but hey whats happening is ok though.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7306503/Woman-breaks-publicly-whipped-100-times-having-pre-marital-sex-Indonesia.html#comments

[andy-hughes]

To use one appalling situation to try and excuse another is bad debate, it always has been.

Yes this is a dreadful practice, but it doesn't mitigate the President's rampant racism, or excuse it, or reduce it even slightly.

[naomi24]

Shhhh Fender. You’re criticising the wrong people.

[ummmm]

Is this the first time you've heard about such punishments?

[Peter Pedant]

//Shhhh Fender . You’re criticising the wrong people.//

er what is the connection between beating a woman ( I hope they had a koran under the arm whilst they did it) and Trump ?
he um doesnt beat people does he - he just sort of .... kissed them.

crazy thread - crazy posts - crazy AB

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - // Shhhh Fender. You’re criticising the wrong people. //

I can't see why - as long as the criticism is aimed accurately, at the extreme bigoted end of Islam common to all faiths, rather than simply the faith itself, which would be an inaccurate generalisation.

Similarly of course, referring to Donald Trump is less of a cricitism, more a statement of fact.

[fiction-factory]

>You’re criticising the wrong people

Meaningless.

Okay, I'll criticise the practice, but I doubt any of us can do much about it. Do you think some on here might defend it?

[JimF]

Such practice is barbaric. Of course it is. I've no doubt that the perpetrators also think it's brutal. The thing is, though, it's their law - the set of rules by which they run things.

But what gives *us* (whoever we are) the right to look down on them or, even worse, to tell them that they're wrong and how great it would be if they could just be a bit more civilised - like us.

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - // Jim, if you think people are gaining the wrong impression of your posts perhaps you should take a very serious look at what you’re posting. We’re only responding to what you’re saying. //

says the AB'er who earlier on today was saying that she thought it wrong that anyone advises anyone else on what to post!

Remember this Naomi?

// I never understand why some people feel it within their remit to advise long term members of their options. //

You should do, you posted it at 09:47 this morning – maybe your memory is fading?

[andy-hughes]

PP - // … er what is the connection between beating a woman ( I hope they had a koran under the arm whilst they did it) and Trump ? //

There isn't one, which is why it is bad debating to try and put it there.

[andy-hughes]

Jim - // But what gives *us* (whoever we are) the right to look down on them or, even worse, to tell them that they're wrong and how great it would be if they could just be a bit more civilised - like us. //

I would agree that it is wrong of us to look down on another faith for their beliefs - except instances like this, where such beliefs lead to physical harm to someone who has transgressed them.

That cannot be right anywhere, ever, and it is beholden on us as a civilised society to challenge such barbaric behaviour each and every time we see it or hear about it.

[JimF]

"us as a civilised society"

There it is again! We're great, aren't we!

[naomi24]

AH, if you want to reference a conversation that had nothing to do with you come back when you know what you’re talking about.

[tonyav]

Why is the barbaric scumbag with the stick wearing a mask, is it ashamed or something.

[andy-hughes]

Naomi - // AH, if you want to reference a conversation that had nothing to do with you come back when you know what you’re talking about. //

All conversations on this site are fair game for anyone to comment on - you are happy to live by that simple edict when it suits you, so don;t try and wriggle out from under it when it exposes you.

I am delighted to see that you know when you are rumbled, you always get huffy, and when challenged again, you usually reply with an 'Oh dear', or some similar avoidance.

I have pointed out your hypocrisy, I shall now be happy to move on with debating the OP.

[andy-hughes]

JimF - // "us as a civilised society"

There it is again! We're great, aren't we! //

Calling out violence in the name of religion doesn't make us 'great' - it just makes us human.

[andy-hughes]

tonyav - // Why is the barbaric scumbag with the stick wearing a mask, is it ashamed or something. //

Anonymity for the administrators of punishment in public is as old as the punishment itself - it prevents retribution from the victim's family and friends.

[Peter Pedant]

// There isn't one, which is why it is bad debating to try and put it there.//

er one pats their back a hundred times and the other says he hasnt thousands of times ?

// if you want to refer a conversation that had nothing to do with you, come back when you know what you’re talking about.// - yikes - or crikey this is the evening for non-sequiturs

made perfect sense to me andie - Ni gobbledeegooking like a hobbledehoy !

[andy-hughes]

JimF - // I've no doubt that the perpetrators also think it's brutal. //

I am sure they do - but in the completely self-righteous superior way exclusive to the religious bigot, that allows them to behave like that, and feel better for doing it.

[gulliver1]

21.12 A/H Spot on !

[naomi24]

AH, I repeat, come back when you know what you’re talking about because as it is you’re talking nonsense. This thread has nothing to do with my conversation with jim and no bearing on my conversation with jim.