http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=5F848189-A45F-46C8-B02A-A8376AB4C512


This is pure barbarism. The basest form of misogyny. Because she admitted to being raped and her attacker denied having raped her, she was found guilty of fornication and stoned to death. She was just a little girl who was attacked and she received the punishment for the crime.

very sad indeed

That is absolutely horrible. Makes me very very sad! What kind of gov't would allow that. It is complete horror

"Sharia courts in Pakistan have punished thousands of raped women by long term imprisonment."

This article makes me feel ill. I can't comprehend why they would do this to a 13 yr. old rape victim.

It's always the woman's fault, don't you know? She's the one being titalating by looking female.

Funny how many religions and cultures blame women for everything, actually. Was not Pandora a female? Helen? Eve?

It is horrific indeed.

But keep in mind Muslim law isn't the only one that see's women in scary ways.

Just two Bible quotes that prove my point.

Woman must marry rapist

If a man [meets] a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her ... He must marry the girl ... He can never divorce her as long as he lives.
-- Deuteronomy 22:28-29


Virgin women are war booty

"Have you allowed all the women to live?" he [Moses] asked them.... "Now ... kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man."
-- Numbers 31:1-18

Not to mention my favorite, the story of Bathsheba.

Woman's husband leaves for war.
Woman takes a bath.
King sees woman and decides he wants to boink her.
King kills woman's husband so he can boink her.
King enpregnates woman.
God kills woman's baby to punish... KING...
King enpregnates woman AGAIN.
New baby becomes next King.
Woman goes down in history as a whore even though the Bible never says she is (she is, in fact, a married woman.)

So this is what it boils down to.

*Woman has no feelings either for her dead husband or her dead baby but is, in fact, a whore for MAKING the King want her and then going to him (which, by the way, wasn't really her choice, now was it?)
*King is punished (in a way that also punishes woman who, remember, has no feelings on the subject), but then is rewarded with an heir (who is Solomon, btw) from the SAME WOMAN.
*God is not only heartless but a Hypocrate.

If I was God, I'd be a little more than annoyed by this.

Ain't that what Sarah Palin did in Alaska?

No. You really have a bizzare sense of humor. This is a young girl who was gang raped and stoned to death, what is funny about it?

How can this be compared to anything Sarah Palin did in Alaska? Do you mean women having to pay for their own rape kits? So do military women. And guess what, the rape kits aren't free, somebody has to pay for them. So make the victim pay and she can sue the rapist for the cost of the kit when she sues him for rape.

Deuteronomy 22:28-29


Deuteronomy 22:28-29 does not necessarily refer to rape. The words "chazaq" (force) and "shakab" (intercourse) clearly mean rape in Deuteronomy 22:25, but "taphas" (lay hold of) and "shakab" (intercourse) doesn't necessarily imply rape. Notice that this law requires that they be "found". None of the other laws on rape require that they be "found". I think "taphas" indicates seduced rather than raped. Why not use "chazaq shakab" again instead of "taphas shakab"? There is a distinction being made here by the author, which many readers choose to ignore. And if the girl is being forced to marry her rapist, why does it only apply if they are caught together? The other cases of rape could be tried and punishment applied if they weren't found. There are too many flaws in the "taphas shakab" = "rape" theory for it to be taken seriously.

If they're ever found.

In any other situation, the individual is responsible for their own medical expenses until the court says otherwise. I'm sorry, but when my friend died in front of his whole family in their living room, they still had to pay for the ambulance and doctors to take him to the hospital. I don't see why women should be excused from their debts because they were victims of a crime. I could see the police picking up the tab when they suspect rape and the victim agrees to prosecute. But the state shouldn't pick them up 100% ever. That's socialism, I don't think anybody should have to pay for the problems of others.

Hummm so, some biblical verses are not to be taken seriously while others are the word of God?

I see a lot of that, people who chose to selectively believe and follow only the bits that suit them at the time.

Must be a tad confusing.

Not a single thread can be held on topic for even 20 posts. A 13 year old girl is raped and executed and people have to take that as an opportunity to ignorantly bash Christianity and Republicans. It's very unseemly to say the least.

Yes, I can see how you are probably confused a lot. You see, the Bible wasn't written in English, it was written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Koine Greek. Those languages have to be translated into English. Sometimes the language is so old, that it's hard to tell what the author was trying to say, so the translators have to do their best. In this case, I think they failed. When taken in context, the verse doesn't support the use of the word "rape". To me, it's very clear that the action being discussed is consensual intercourse.

its a crime.as a victim why should i pay the police to gather evidence for any crime?that's crazy.What do we need cops for.We would just hire private dectectives.Why go to court and cost you money?I'll just take matters into my own hands.Being the victim of violent crime is not a "problem".Its the perpetrators"problem"so if you want someone to pay,charge them.
Dropping dead is a health issue and not a crime.

Great idea Cute!

I think they should charge rapists for the rape kit, for counseling services, for sexually transmitted disease testing and treatment and that's just the start.

You dont have to do the history lesson Spider. All a person has to understand to put these things into context is to know that values and social ethics (towards women and a lot of things)have changed in two thousand+ years.

RIF!

So make the victim pay and she can sue the rapist for the cost of the kit when she sues him for rape.

I could see the police picking up the tab when they suspect rape and the victim agrees to prosecute.

It seems that is exactly what you are saying, isn't it?

I already said that. But should the guy have to pay if he's found innocent? NO. So the woman pays up front and the guy pays if found guilty. He is innocent until proven innocent, right?