Saudis order elderly woman to 40 lashes for mingling

[Kuya]

That's the thing. It could be who benefits the most, or benefits no one, but how do you know which one to use? Which one of these choices is better? See the circular logic there? You can't define better, because you can't define the criteria to put against it. Any of that demands that you have to say something like 'human life is priceless' or 'what benefits the most is best', and you really can't say either or anything like that is 'right'.

Edit: Basically, you can't logically define morals unless you're willing to submit to an unprovable statement.

Well that seems essential. Almost all the knowledge we have is based on unprovable principles. As humans we just have to decide where to stop questioning and move on from there, yes for some this is unacceptable, but likewise we can't make any progress if we don't accept an assumption somewhere. In this case i prefer to accept these principles based on how many it benefits and how little it harms, but i have no doubt that anyone would sufficient knowledge could easily point out why i somehow think that little harm is acceptable, specifically, and coincidentally, when it doesn't seem to harm me.

[TheShadyMan]

Oh, I know we can't make progress if we don't stop at one point and say 'this is enough evidence', but the problem is that we'll declare something with 'enough evidence' and more will come along that disproves it, and no one will give it merit because they're too set with what the old evidence proved. What it comes down to is people are so resistant to accepting their own human fallibility we get tripped up in shit that is irrelevant.

[Tomk]

Not to derail the derail but Saudi Arabia means more than oil. They are the US's biggest customer of our #1 export.

U.S. Arms Clients Profiles--SAUDI ARABIA

Back on/off topic: The first thought that I had about the moral debate was that moral judgment is based on empathy. Elvis was talking about babies and "The Natural State" and I thought that even they can empathize. Well it turns out that they cant. I found this: FeralChildren.com | Feral children and the nature-nurture debate

So if I understand this correctly, morals and the concept of right and wrong are completely learned. Nothing is inherent? Empathy and by extension morals, being a vicarious emotion, is based on our own experiences. Then again, what's wrong with that? Why do I need something beyond "human" for answers like this?

...I hate you guys.

Edit: I understand that your conversation is way ahead of this post. This is just me catching up.

[Brill Weave]

Substance Abuse Services Center

This explains so much.

[TheShadyMan]

This explains so much.

I'm just going because court's gonna order me to on the 2nd, so I'm putting up the effort to do it now, so I can show the judge I've been trying and hopefully plea out/reduce my charges.

[TheShadyMan]

Not to derail the derail but Saudi Arabia means more than oil. They are the US's biggest customer of our #1 export.

U.S. Arms Clients Profiles--SAUDI ARABIA

Back on/off topic: The first thought that I had about the moral debate was that moral judgment is based on empathy. Elvis was talking about babies and "The Natural State" and I thought that even they can empathize. Well it turns out that they cant. I found this: FeralChildren.com | Feral children and the nature-nurture debate

So if I understand this correctly, morals and the concept of right and wrong are completely learned. Nothing is inherent? Empathy and by extension morals, being a vicarious emotion, is based on our own experiences. Then again, what's wrong with that? Why do I need something beyond "human" for answers like this?

...I hate you guys.

Edit: I understand that your conversation is way ahead of this post. This is just me catching up.

Yeah, that's pretty much what I was saying. Morality is a human system, something we created, not something hardwired into us like some of our social tendencies. Very few things are 'universal' when it comes to human tendencies, most of what you are is cultural molding.

[Elvis]

Not to derail the derail but Saudi Arabia means more than oil. They are the US's biggest customer of our #1 export.

U.S. Arms Clients Profiles--SAUDI ARABIA

Back on/off topic: The first thought that I had about the moral debate was that moral judgment is based on empathy. Elvis was talking about babies and "The Natural State" and I thought that even they can empathize. Well it turns out that they cant. I found this: FeralChildren.com | Feral children and the nature-nurture debate

So if I understand this correctly, morals and the concept of right and wrong are completely learned. Nothing is inherent? Empathy and by extension morals, being a vicarious emotion, is based on our own experiences. Then again, what's wrong with that? Why do I need something beyond "human" for answers like this?

...I hate you guys.

Edit: I understand that your conversation is way ahead of this post. This is just me catching up.

The feral children thing is very interesting.

I was talking about natural law/rights though. Not morality per se.

Although, I think the implication of my post was that because we all have the will to live we *should [blah blah]* - so everything after 'should' would imply a value judgment.

Yea..I don't know. I think there are 'truths' about human behavior. We all feel pain/fear/sadness/etc.

But the conclusions about these feelings are subjective.

[Tomk]

Yeah, at first I thought that there was a natural foundation of morals. It was not based on your statement but spawned by it.

[Neosutra]

So shady, do you think the people of Saudi would put up with equally as much shit if it was just the government oppressing them and not their god?

You state it is just their culture, and I agree to some extent, but it is the theocracy that is utilized as the catalyst of this oppression. People would stand for less shit if they didnt have "gods will" behind their motives.

[TheShadyMan]

Neosutra, you don't have to lecture to me how retarded religion is. Not to mention religion falls under culture.

[Elvis]

I don't know how you'd prove that Neo. I mean, in relation to Saudi Arabia and it's dissident culture.

Religion does play a role. Not to the extent that many people in the West assert.

It's so easy to pick passages out of the Quran and say "See, I told you so! Those crazy Muslims!"

But then how do you account for the countless moderate Arabs/Muslims?

Religion does play a role but it's not the sole reason. The societal pressures and political repression in that country are far more meaningful.

And I think the Saudi theocracy IS oppressive inherently. Rather than as a catalyst for oppression. It's also about power and wealth.

There have been plenty of secular dictatorships and secular tyrannies.

[Neosutra]

@Shadyman: Religion doesnt necessarily fall under culture, as religion is wholely dependent on your interpretations, and changes between cultures. Islam in america is quite different than Islam in Saudi.

@Elvis: I didnt pick out any passages of the Quran, as it is irrelevant. The fact remains that this theocratic government oppresses its people in the name of god. The motivations are obviously power/money, but that isnt really the point. People are much more likely to revolt against secular oppression (as you referenced) than theocracies.

And yes, Ill say it: Islam is a violent crap religion that opresses the masses and belittles women to a rediculous extent, wether taken in moderation or extremity.

And yes, christianity can be/is just as bad, and would be worse if they had the same control over this country.

[Elvis]

@Shadyman: Religion doesnt necessarily fall under culture, as religion is wholely dependent on your interpretations, and changes between cultures. Islam in america is quite different than Islam in Saudi.

@Elvis: I didnt pick out any passages of the Quran, as it is irrelevant. The fact remains that this theocratic government oppresses its people in the name of god. The motivations are obviously power/money, but that isnt really the point. People are much more likely to revolt against secular oppression (as you referenced) than theocracies.

And yes, Ill say it: Islam is a violent crap religion that opresses the masses and belittles women to a rediculous extent, wether taken in moderation or extremity.

And yes, christianity can be/is just as bad, and would be worse if they had the same control over this country.

I wasn't implying that you'd pick out passages w/o context. But then you just bashed the entire religion. And Christianity too!

The point is that all these religions were written in such a way that they reflected the world at that time. So of course they will be waaaaay out of step w/ the modern world.

People pick and choose what they like in their religion. They ignore/discard the rest.

That's common sense. We're assuming all Muslims or all Christians are fundamentalists.

There are plenty of Christians who take part in solidarity campaigns around the world helping the poor/sick/etc. So many examples. I don't think there is a point in going through them.

These institutions are obsolete. But they are inspiring to many people and give them a sense of direction.

And if people are continually oppressed they will interpret this old archaic religious text literally to reflect their own anger/frustration. So for example - 'jihad' will be interpreted as 'holy war'. But it can mean peaceful struggle as well. (YouTubers who are Muslim often explain this.)

@Bold text

Exactly my point. Religion plays a role - sure. The societal pressures - whether they be political/cultural/economic/etc. are much more compelling. These variables transcend all societies - all people. The fundamentals IMO.

[TheShadyMan]

Islam in america is quite different than Islam in Saudi.

Exactly. The culture bends religions one way or another so it'll fit in with other aspects. You can't tell me Christianity isn't a part of American culture, 'In God We Trust' is printed on our money, One Nation, Under God. If you seriously think Religion isn't a part of culture, then you're wrong. What about in India? Cows are allowed to roam the streets freely because the Hindus think they are sacred.

[Neosutra]

People that desire to help others are humanitarians, regardless of wether they do it with a cross around their neck, or with secular motivations.

People that oppress and kill are tyrants and murderers, regardless of wether they do it with a cross around their neck, or with secular motivations.

However we arent talking about how bad it is that people are helping starving kids in africa in the name of their religion (even if their main goal is to convert their souls), we are talking about how bad it is that people are using these beliefs as a weapon.

Dont give me the "well it can be interpreted in a good way too" crap when we are directly talking about an entire country that uses it as a form of oppression. The "good" interpretations are irrelevant when we are specifically talking about the use of it for destructive motives.

You people have gotten away with saying your religion is a religion of peace for way too long, when it is quite clear that when let off your leash you will use it for nothing more than violent oppression. How can you stand there and say it is good when any time it is allowed to run its path, it is used for corruption. There is NO justification for the shit they pull there.

[Elvis]

People that desire to help others are humanitarians, regardless of wether they do it with a cross around their neck, or with secular motivations.

People that oppress and kill are tyrants and murderers, regardless of wether they do it with a cross around their neck, or with secular motivations.

However we arent talking about how bad it is that people are helping starving kids in africa in the name of their religion (even if their main goal is to convert their souls), we are talking about how bad it is that people are using these beliefs as a weapon.

Dont give me the "well it can be interpreted in a good way too" crap when we are directly talking about an entire country that uses it as a form of oppression. The "good" interpretations are irrelevant when we are specifically talking about the use of it for destructive motives.

You people have gotten away with saying your religion is a religion of peace for way too long, when it is quite clear that when let off your leash you will use it for nothing more than violent oppression. How can you stand there and say it is good when any time it is allowed to run its path, it is used for corruption. There is NO justification for the shit they pull there.

@Italics
You seem to agree with me. However, people do feel a spiritual calling to help those in need. Who was that abolitionist? The one who was executed? John Brown? I can't remember. But he felt compelled to free the slaves because it was the Christian thing to do.

Now, I don't need to even give examples for this. I'm not saying people ONLY do good or bad things because of ONE reason (religion in this case). There are several factors. People like John Brown, were INSPIRED by their religion.

Now, he's actually a controversial figure. There are much better examples to prove my point - rhetorically. Mother Theresa or whoever. Those Catholic nuns who were murdered by Death Squads in Latin America during the 80s. Etc.

Religion can be a source of inspiration for all sorts of behavior. So like I said - it's up to the person interpreting it. The conclusion I draw is that these religious texts are getting less and less relevant. So we pick and choose.

@Bold

Yea. You don't seem very consistent with you argument. You're agreeing w/ me and even going further with your explanation and then coming back to 'it's all the religion's fault'.

Then you condemn an entire country. What do you know about Saudi Arabia? Do you know how the average Saudi feels?

I don't either but I'm not going to condemn the entire place because of their oppressive government. That's not to say there aren't other forces in that society that are abusing people. It's just not that simple though. And like you said - Muslims in America are - the vast majority - not the same as Muslims in Saudi Arabia.

So OTHER factors are coming into play that are producing a different interpretation of Islam in Saudi Arabia.

Hence, it's NOT the religion itself but the interpretation WHICH is dependent on OTHER factors.

I don't know who you're calling out when you say "you people." That's pretty insulting. I'm not Muslim BTW, but nevertheless you sound really childish.

[archibaldcrane]

What about in India? Cows are allowed to roam the streets freely because the Hindus think they are sacred.

Yeah, but that's funny. If the cows were allowed to give women 40 lashes for ridiculous reasons, then I'd say "Fuck India" too.

[Elvis]

Oh and I noticed you slipped in the word 'justification'.

Who is justifying ANYTHING?

I am not saying 40 lashes for mingling w/ some dudes is understandable.

I'm not condoning this behavior. I'm trying to understand it. You want to fight them Team America style or you want a real solution? You go to the source.

And the source can't be lolreligion. Why? You said it yourself: Muslims here are not like Muslims there.

[Kuya]

One fascinating thing about Islam and Darwinism was that there was no contradiction between the to which made is easier for Muslims to accept the concepts behind Natural Selection and such others, as in the Coran there is no passage that explicitly states how the world was created and how humans were created, and the Coran itself even states that it should be read metaphorically and not literally, and another kicker for the people who like to bash religions without actually looking into them is that it also states in the Coran that Mahoma was not to replace Jesus or David/Moses but rather be another interpreter.

Here comes the hilarious part, the fundamentalists in the ME didn't even have Darwinism in their sights till people like Dawkins started spouting how Darwinism is incompatible with a god, which created a whole shitstorm with Islamic theologists. Amazing how people who supposedly are for progress manage to mess things up.

[Kuya]

I posted this before, but it's an example on how issues are far more varied and complex than the people who want to turn them into their little pet issues can possibly understand.

Yasser turned onto a side street, then braked suddenly. “Oh shit, it’s a checkpoint,” he said, inclining his head toward some traffic cops in brown uniforms. “Do you have your ID?” he asked me. He wasn’t worried about the gay-themed nature of his tour—he didn’t want to be caught alone with a woman. I rummaged through my purse, realizing that I’d left my passport in the hotel for safekeeping. Yasser looked behind him to see if he could reverse the car, but had no choice except to proceed. To his relief, the cops nodded us through. “God, they freaked me out,” Yasser said. As he resumed his narration, I recalled something he had told me earlier. “It’s a lot easier to be gay than straight here,” he had said. “If you go out with a girl, people will start to ask her questions. But if I have a date upstairs and my family is downstairs, they won’t even come up.”

In Saudi Arabia, sodomy is punishable by death. Though that penalty is seldom applied, just this February a man in the Mecca region was executed for having sex with a boy, among other crimes. (For this reason, the names of most people in this story have been changed.) Ask many Saudis about homosexuality, and they’ll wince with repugnance. “I disapprove,” Rania, a 32-year-old human-resources manager, told me firmly. “Women weren’t meant to be with women, and men aren’t supposed to be with men.”

This legal and public condemnation notwithstanding, the kingdom leaves considerable space for homosexual behavior. As long as gays and lesbians maintain a public front of obeisance to Wahhabist norms, they are left to do what they want in private. Vibrant communities of men who enjoy sex with other men can be found in cosmopolitan cities like Jeddah and Riyadh. They meet in schools, in cafés, in the streets, and on the Internet. “You can be cruised anywhere in Saudi Arabia, any time of the day,” said Radwan, a 42-year-old gay Saudi American who grew up in various Western cities and now lives in Jeddah. “They’re quite shameless about it.” Talal, a Syrian who moved to Riyadh in 2000, calls the Saudi capital a “gay heaven.”

This society thrives just below the surface. During the afternoon, traffic cops patrol outside girls’ schools as classes end, in part to keep boys away. But they exert little control over what goes on inside. A few years ago, a Jeddah- based newspaper ran a story on lesbianism in high schools, reporting that girls were having sex in the bathrooms. Yasmin, a 21-year-old student in Riyadh who’d had a brief sexual relationship with a girlfriend (and was the only Saudi woman who’d had a lesbian relationship who was willing to speak with me for this story), told me that one of the department buildings at her college is known as a lesbian enclave. The building has large bathroom stalls, which provide privacy, and walls covered with graffiti offering romantic and religious advice; tips include “she doesn’t really love you no matter what she tells you” and “before you engage in anything with [her] remember: God is watching you.” In Saudi Arabia, “It’s easier to be a lesbian [than a heterosexual]. There’s an overwhelming number of people who turn to lesbianism,” Yasmin said, adding that the number of men in the kingdom who turn to gay sex is even greater. “They’re not really homosexual,” she said. “They’re like cell mates in prison.”

This analogy came up again and again during my conversations. As Radwan, the Saudi American, put it, “Some Saudi [men] can’t have sex with women, so they have sex with guys. When the sexes are so strictly segregated”—men are allowed little contact with women outside their families, in order to protect women’s purity—“how do they have a chance to have sex with a woman and not get into trouble?” Tariq, a 24-year-old in the travel industry, explains that many “tops” are simply hard up for sex, looking to break their abstinence in whatever way they can. Francis, a 34-year-old beauty queen from the Philippines (in 2003 he won a gay beauty pageant held in a private house in Jeddah by a group of Filipinos), reported that he’s had sex with Saudi men whose wives were pregnant or menstruating; when those circumstances changed, most of the men stopped calling. “If they can’t use their wives,” Francis said, “they have this option with gays.”

Gay courting in the kingdom is often overt—in fact, the preferred mode is cruising. “When I was new here, I was worried when six or seven cars would follow me as I walked down the street,” Jamie, a 31-year-old Filipino florist living in Jeddah, told me. “Especially if you’re pretty like me, they won’t stop chasing you.” John Bradley, the author of Saudi Arabia Exposed: Inside a Kingdom in Crisis (2005), says that most male Western expatriates here, gay or not, have been propositioned by Saudi men driving by “at any time of the day or night, quite openly and usually very, very persistently.”

Many gay expatriates say they feel more at home in the kingdom than in their native lands. Jason, a South African educator who has lived in Jeddah since 2002, notes that although South Africa allows gay marriage, “it’s as though there are more gays here.” For Talal, Riyadh became an escape. When he was 17 and living in Da mas cus, his father walked in on him having sex with a male friend. He hit Talal and grounded him for two months, letting him out of the house only after he swore he was no longer attracted to men. Talal’s pale face flushed crimson as he recalled his shame at disappointing his family. Eager to escape the weight of their expectations, he took a job in Riyadh. When he announced that he would be moving, his father responded, “You know all Saudis like boys, and you are white. Take care.” Talal was pleased to find a measure of truth in his father’s warning—his fair skin made him a hit among the locals.

Marcos, a 41-year-old from the Philippines, was arrested in 1996 for attending a party featuring a drag show. He spent nine months in prison, where he got 200 lashes, before being deported. Still, he opted to return; he loves his work in fashion, which pays decently, and the social opportunities are an added bonus. “Guys romp around and parade in front of you,” he told me. “They will seduce you. It’s up to you how many you want, every day.”

Notice how this incredibly oppressive nation somehow ends up being a "paradise" for people who are not strictly heterosexual? The irony is hilarious.