A Young Woman Stoned for Adultery

[DarkFury]

It's kind of unfair to post an alleged story and picture that has no link at all. How do we know you didn't just make this up?

This is a trivial point (designed to dodge the issue) given that this is a consistent reality in the Middle East.

No, it's an essential point.
If I tell you green glob men are invading from Pluto right now, but I don't have a link --- are you gonna believe me? You're willing to swallow whatever your told with no basis whatsoever?

Open wide, Dickhead.

Oh, shut the fuck up. You do what you do to avoid the issue; and you do this all the time. Nobody else doubted the authenticity of the story. But you have to act like this is an f'ing newspaper that needs to be sourced. Grow the fuck up and stop stifling adult convo.

Suck my dick, shit-for-brains. I wanted a source for the same reason anyone wants a source -- because without it the whole thing's hearsay. And without that we have no reference and no context, as you just gave me above. You can't address an issue without some kind of basis in reality, and hell the fuck no I'm not going to take the word of a brand new poster with a total of two posts that this is a legitimate story. If you do, you're a retard.

That's the way the world of reality works, child, like it or lump it. And all you do by whining about this is make yourself look even fucking stupider than you already do.

So bite me.

I really hate to break this to you, okay maybe not. But OP-ED means OPINE-EDITORIAL and those do NOT require links. You cannot link a thought.

 

[Pogo]

It's kind of unfair to post an alleged story and picture that has no link at all. How do we know you didn't just make this up?

This is a trivial point (designed to dodge the issue) given that this is a consistent reality in the Middle East.

No, it's an essential point.
If I tell you green glob men are invading from Pluto right now, but I don't have a link --- are you gonna believe me? You're willing to swallow whatever your told with no basis whatsoever?

Open wide, Dickhead.

Oh, shut the fuck up. You do what you do to avoid the issue; and you do this all the time. Nobody else doubted the authenticity of the story. But you have to act like this is an f'ing newspaper that needs to be sourced. Grow the fuck up and stop stifling adult convo.

Suck my dick, shit-for-brains. I wanted a source for the same reason anyone wants a source -- because without it the whole thing's hearsay. And without that we have no reference and no context, as you just gave me above. You can't address an issue without some kind of basis in reality, and hell the fuck no I'm not going to take the word of a brand new poster with a total of two posts that this is a legitimate story. If you do, you're a retard.

That's the way the world of reality works, child, like it or lump it. And all you do by whining about this is make yourself look even fucking stupider than you already do.

So bite me.

I really hate to break this to you, okay maybe not. But OP-ED means OPINE-EDITORIAL and those do NOT require links. You cannot link a thought.

And I hate to break it to you Pinko but the OP starts with a reference to an event with no link, and therefore no basis, and therefore no definition. Without a definition it cannot serve as a basis.

Moreover that citation contained an analysis (religion as causation) which I suspected was erroneous, and now with Gasbag's link that erronity has been confirmed.

Low hangin' fruit. Yum.

 

[Gracie]

The Stoning Of Soraya. Netflix. Not streamed, gotta get the cd mailed to you. Based on a true story..just like the one in the OP. But Soraya was stoned because her husband wanted to marry a 13 year old and couldn't unless he could divorce his wife. Village said he had to have a good reason. So he and one of his friends in the village set her up. He would not support her or their children and stayed elsewhere...and when no money was available for food, she took a job with a man who lost his wife and needed a housekeeper. Then the set up was done and all he had to do was accuse her of sleeping with her employer. The employer said none of it was true, but nobody cared to listen to him. The friends of Sorayas husband got the villagers riled up that she was committing adultry and she was to be stoned as punishment. So..they did. And the husband also forced the children to throw stones as well. Until she was a bloody pulpy dead mess. After her death...he went to his wannabe child bride to marry her, but he took too long murdering his wife and she was married to someone else. So he murdered his wife for nothing.
The movie was explicit. Graphic. Horrifying to watch. And it happens all the time over there.

Fuck that shithole and all the scumbags in it.

 

[DarkFury]

This is a trivial point (designed to dodge the issue) given that this is a consistent reality in the Middle East.

No, it's an essential point.
If I tell you green glob men are invading from Pluto right now, but I don't have a link --- are you gonna believe me? You're willing to swallow whatever your told with no basis whatsoever?

Open wide, Dickhead.

Oh, shut the fuck up. You do what you do to avoid the issue; and you do this all the time. Nobody else doubted the authenticity of the story. But you have to act like this is an f'ing newspaper that needs to be sourced. Grow the fuck up and stop stifling adult convo.

Suck my dick, shit-for-brains. I wanted a source for the same reason anyone wants a source -- because without it the whole thing's hearsay. And without that we have no reference and no context, as you just gave me above. You can't address an issue without some kind of basis in reality, and hell the fuck no I'm not going to take the word of a brand new poster with a total of two posts that this is a legitimate story. If you do, you're a retard.

That's the way the world of reality works, child, like it or lump it. And all you do by whining about this is make yourself look even fucking stupider than you already do.

So bite me.

I really hate to break this to you, okay maybe not. But OP-ED means OPINE-EDITORIAL and those do NOT require links. You cannot link a thought.

And I hate to break it to you Pinko but the OP starts with a reference to an event with no link, and therefore no basis, and therefore no definition. Without a definition it cannot serve as a basis.

Moreover that citation contained an analysis (religion as causation) which I suspected was erroneous, and now with Gasbag's link that erronity has been confirmed.

Low hangin' fruit. Yum.

An OP-ED does not require being confirmed. Only spoken/written.

 

[Pogo]

No, it's an essential point.
If I tell you green glob men are invading from Pluto right now, but I don't have a link --- are you gonna believe me? You're willing to swallow whatever your told with no basis whatsoever?

Open wide, Dickhead.

Oh, shut the fuck up. You do what you do to avoid the issue; and you do this all the time. Nobody else doubted the authenticity of the story. But you have to act like this is an f'ing newspaper that needs to be sourced. Grow the fuck up and stop stifling adult convo.

Suck my dick, shit-for-brains. I wanted a source for the same reason anyone wants a source -- because without it the whole thing's hearsay. And without that we have no reference and no context, as you just gave me above. You can't address an issue without some kind of basis in reality, and hell the fuck no I'm not going to take the word of a brand new poster with a total of two posts that this is a legitimate story. If you do, you're a retard.

That's the way the world of reality works, child, like it or lump it. And all you do by whining about this is make yourself look even fucking stupider than you already do.

So bite me.

I really hate to break this to you, okay maybe not. But OP-ED means OPINE-EDITORIAL and those do NOT require links. You cannot link a thought.

And I hate to break it to you Pinko but the OP starts with a reference to an event with no link, and therefore no basis, and therefore no definition. Without a definition it cannot serve as a basis.

Moreover that citation contained an analysis (religion as causation) which I suspected was erroneous, and now with Gasbag's link that erronity has been confirmed.

Low hangin' fruit. Yum.

An OP-ED does not require being confirmed. Only spoken/written.

The story claimed to be an event in it, however, does. Else it's not an event.

I didn't even address the op-ed part of the OP. At all. Wasn't interested in that.

 

[Gracie]

The Stoning of Soraya M. Trailer - IMDb

 

[Gracie]

You guys can bicker all you want about links, the OP talking about Jesus, the sky being blue, the sea being salty....it won't change the fact that Stoning is Sharia Law and it happens ALL THE FUCKING TIME over there.

 

[Pogo]

The Stoning of Soraya M. Trailer - IMDb

Actually it's right here. No need to pay Netflix.

​

Oops -- I see the subtitles are kinda halfway cut off.

 

[Pogo]

You guys can bicker all you want about links, the OP talking about Jesus, the sky being blue, the sea being salty....it won't change the fact that Stoning is Sharia Law and it happens ALL THE FUCKING TIME over there.

It happens but it isn't Sharia. It isn't even Islamic.

For proof of that look no further than the bible reference in the OP, referring to the woman about to be stoned for adultery. That was centuries before Islam even existed.

It isn't Jewish either, or Christian or Hindu or Sikh. It simply isn't part of religion.
I don't know what's not clear about that.

It's kind of like a visitor coming to this country for the first time, looking around a while and then concluding that Christianity invented the Christmas Tree and the Easter Bunny. Those are way older too.

 

[Gracie]

The Stoning of Soraya M. Trailer - IMDb

Actually it's right here. No need to pay Netflix.

​

Get your popcorn then and watch it. Then tell me it isn't religion based.
And while watching, pretend you are Soraya. WATCH IT. Then come talk about it if it suits you.

Personally....I need to keep my BP down so I doubt I return to this thread. It pisses me off. AFUCKINGLOT!

 

[Pogo]

The Stoning of Soraya M. Trailer - IMDb

Actually it's right here. No need to pay Netflix.

​

Get your popcorn then and watch it. Then tell me it isn't religion based.
And while watching, pretend you are Soraya. WATCH IT. Then come talk about it if it suits you.

Personally....I need to keep my BP down so I doubt I return to this thread. It pisses me off. AFUCKINGLOT!

I hear ya sis, pissed me off too. I've corrected this shit over and over and over. It's playing whack-a-mole with da bigots.

 

[turtledude]

different country-but you do sort of wished someone could have come over that mob in an attack fighter and say lay a few WP shells on the stoners or better yet someone with a Barrett 50 800 meters out start exploding the heads of the scumbags

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Jesus also said 'give to Caesar what is Caesar's.' Or, don't interfere in other countries' cultures. Fix your own first.

The Eagle says these bastards should be taken out and stoned themselves.

*****SMILE*****

 

[fanger]

America is so much more civilized, they use a lethal injection or a firing squad when they carry out the death penalty

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

As I suspected -- an "honor killing". It's an ancient tribal custom enacted for social control that predates Islam, Christianism, Sikhism, Hinduism and every other religion where it still takes place. It's fucked up, it's primitive, it's based on archconservative hyperpatriarchy --- but it's got nothing to do with religion. It has to do with women scaring the shit out of men so they get violent about it. The last quoted sentence underscores that.

Not religious. Just as the Gospel event cited in the OP would have had nothing to do with Judaism. It dates back thousands of years to nomadic tribes jealous of their possessions.

You're welcome.

Give me a break. This thing has Islam fingerprints all over it. Who gives a sh** what you think the origin of this "custom" is.

Too bad for your ignorant bigot ass it was already thousands of years old when Mohammed was born huh Sparky??

Once again you have nothing but vague wisps of disjointed suspicions. "Has Islam fingerprints all over it". Suck my ass, you ignorant swine.

How many times have we spelled this shit out while you bigots go ?

>> In many Arab countries, the practice of honour killing dates back to pre-Islamic times when Arab settlers occupied a region adjacent to Sindh, known as Baluchistan (in Pakistan).57 These Arab settlers had patriarchal traditions such as live burials of newly born daughters. Such traditions trace back to the earliest historic times of Ancient Babylon, where the predominant view was that a woman's virginity belonged to her family.58

There is no mention of honour killing in the Quran or Hadiths. Honour killing, in Islamic definitions, refers specifically to extra-legal punishment by the family against a woman, and is forbidden by the Sharia (Islamic law). Religious authorities disagree with extra punishments such as honour killing and prohibit it, so the practice of it is a cultural and not a religious issue. However, since Islam has influence over vast numbers of Muslims in many countries and from many cultures, some use Islam to justify honour killing even though there is no support for honour killing in Islam. << -- Origins of Honor Killing​

Where's your link to "fingerprints", Iggie-boy?

You want an demon -- go for the patriarchy that creates this shit.

-- or would that hit too close to home?

I dont' give a fuck that you think forms of murder existed before Islam. That's obvious to anyone with half a brain. The reality is Islam fosters these killings. So, save us your dumbass history lesson, sparky.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Oh, shut the fuck up. You do what you do to avoid the issue; and you do this all the time. Nobody else doubted the authenticity of the story. But you have to act like this is an f'ing newspaper that needs to be sourced. Grow the fuck up and stop stifling adult convo.

Suck my dick, shit-for-brains. I wanted a source for the same reason anyone wants a source -- because without it the whole thing's hearsay. And without that we have no reference and no context, as you just gave me above. You can't address an issue without some kind of basis in reality, and hell the fuck no I'm not going to take the word of a brand new poster with a total of two posts that this is a legitimate story. If you do, you're a retard.

That's the way the world of reality works, child, like it or lump it. And all you do by whining about this is make yourself look even fucking stupider than you already do.

So bite me.

I really hate to break this to you, okay maybe not. But OP-ED means OPINE-EDITORIAL and those do NOT require links. You cannot link a thought.

And I hate to break it to you Pinko but the OP starts with a reference to an event with no link, and therefore no basis, and therefore no definition. Without a definition it cannot serve as a basis.

Moreover that citation contained an analysis (religion as causation) which I suspected was erroneous, and now with Gasbag's link that erronity has been confirmed.

Low hangin' fruit. Yum.

An OP-ED does not require being confirmed. Only spoken/written.

The story claimed to be an event in it, however, does. Else it's not an event.

I didn't even address the op-ed part of the OP. At all. Wasn't interested in that.

You meant to deflect like a little bitch maggot that you are.

 

[fanger]

We dont have the Death penalty here, you should try it

 

[Pogo]

As I suspected -- an "honor killing". It's an ancient tribal custom enacted for social control that predates Islam, Christianism, Sikhism, Hinduism and every other religion where it still takes place. It's fucked up, it's primitive, it's based on archconservative hyperpatriarchy --- but it's got nothing to do with religion. It has to do with women scaring the shit out of men so they get violent about it. The last quoted sentence underscores that.

Not religious. Just as the Gospel event cited in the OP would have had nothing to do with Judaism. It dates back thousands of years to nomadic tribes jealous of their possessions.

You're welcome.

Give me a break. This thing has Islam fingerprints all over it. Who gives a sh** what you think the origin of this "custom" is.

Too bad for your ignorant bigot ass it was already thousands of years old when Mohammed was born huh Sparky??

Once again you have nothing but vague wisps of disjointed suspicions. "Has Islam fingerprints all over it". Suck my ass, you ignorant swine.

How many times have we spelled this shit out while you bigots go ?

>> In many Arab countries, the practice of honour killing dates back to pre-Islamic times when Arab settlers occupied a region adjacent to Sindh, known as Baluchistan (in Pakistan).57 These Arab settlers had patriarchal traditions such as live burials of newly born daughters. Such traditions trace back to the earliest historic times of Ancient Babylon, where the predominant view was that a woman's virginity belonged to her family.58

There is no mention of honour killing in the Quran or Hadiths. Honour killing, in Islamic definitions, refers specifically to extra-legal punishment by the family against a woman, and is forbidden by the Sharia (Islamic law). Religious authorities disagree with extra punishments such as honour killing and prohibit it, so the practice of it is a cultural and not a religious issue. However, since Islam has influence over vast numbers of Muslims in many countries and from many cultures, some use Islam to justify honour killing even though there is no support for honour killing in Islam. << -- Origins of Honor Killing​

Where's your link to "fingerprints", Iggie-boy?

You want an demon -- go for the patriarchy that creates this shit.

-- or would that hit too close to home?

I dont' give a fuck that you think forms of murder existed before Islam. That's obvious to anyone with half a brain. The reality is Islam fosters these killings. So, save us your dumbass history lesson, sparky.

Fortunately, those of us with complete brains have a right hemisphere, which gives us the context, which tells us an ancient cultural artifact that has been recorded all over the world from ancient Rome to the Aztec empire, and still goes on prominently in the Subcontinent today (where its perps happen to be Hindus and Sikhs) cannot possibly have had any kind of roots in "Islam".

The Holey Babble story referenced in the OP --- in which Jesus walks up to stop a stoning about to take place --- in itself tells us it was already extant THEN --- some six centuries before Mohammad was even born.

Linear time, vacuum-brain.

Incidentally it's not a "history lesson" as much as Anthropology. But the fact that you regard such crucial background info as "dumb" and would rather run with hair-on-fire bigotry because your head isn't big enough to accommodate realities, just confirms my signline all over again.

Suck my dick, shit-for-brains. I wanted a source for the same reason anyone wants a source -- because without it the whole thing's hearsay. And without that we have no reference and no context, as you just gave me above. You can't address an issue without some kind of basis in reality, and hell the fuck no I'm not going to take the word of a brand new poster with a total of two posts that this is a legitimate story. If you do, you're a retard.

That's the way the world of reality works, child, like it or lump it. And all you do by whining about this is make yourself look even fucking stupider than you already do.

So bite me.

I really hate to break this to you, okay maybe not. But OP-ED means OPINE-EDITORIAL and those do NOT require links. You cannot link a thought.

And I hate to break it to you Pinko but the OP starts with a reference to an event with no link, and therefore no basis, and therefore no definition. Without a definition it cannot serve as a basis.

Moreover that citation contained an analysis (religion as causation) which I suspected was erroneous, and now with Gasbag's link that erronity has been confirmed.

Low hangin' fruit. Yum.

An OP-ED does not require being confirmed. Only spoken/written.

The story claimed to be an event in it, however, does. Else it's not an event.

I didn't even address the op-ed part of the OP. At all. Wasn't interested in that.

You meant to deflect like a little bitch maggot that you are.

Hey Gasbag ----

36 simultaneous tsunamis have wiped out the city of Port Fart, Idaho. This opened up a crevice in the continental shelf that sent the entire slab of western North America out to the Pacific Ocean where it declared itself the independent country of Canadifornia and launched five nukes at your house three minutes ago.

I don't have a link though.

You buyin'? Or are you gonna "deflect" asking for "evidence"?

Better run, dumbass.

 

[Pogo]

America is so much more civilized, they use a lethal injection or a firing squad when they carry out the death penalty

Aren't we still toasting people with a spaghetti colander on their head?

The comparison is worthy; the only difference is we formalize the process to where it has to be declared by a guy holding a hammer wearing a black dress. Then we do it indoors so there are no rainouts. That's because we smart.

Actually they have the same kind of proxy judges in India, where they're called a khap panchayat. I don't know that they wear black dresses and carry hammers though.

This massive deflection to a cherrypicked religion as causation for this monstrosity completely --- and conveniently --- takes the viewer's eye off the ball of the root cause, which is hyperpatriarchy. Pointing a finger at those that might be coincident with Islam turns a blind eye to, and therefore condemns to death, those victims of the same cultural artifact that might be coincident with Hinduism, Sikhism, Christianism, or none of the above. And this in turn ensures that the barbarity continues. Attacking a symptom instead of a disease tends to work that way.

Attributing "honor killing" to "Islam" is like attributing the existence of the Grand Canyon to the government of Arizona. It completely ignores which came before the other.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

As I suspected -- an "honor killing". It's an ancient tribal custom enacted for social control that predates Islam, Christianism, Sikhism, Hinduism and every other religion where it still takes place. It's fucked up, it's primitive, it's based on archconservative hyperpatriarchy --- but it's got nothing to do with religion. It has to do with women scaring the shit out of men so they get violent about it. The last quoted sentence underscores that.

Not religious. Just as the Gospel event cited in the OP would have had nothing to do with Judaism. It dates back thousands of years to nomadic tribes jealous of their possessions.

You're welcome.

Give me a break. This thing has Islam fingerprints all over it. Who gives a sh** what you think the origin of this "custom" is.

Too bad for your ignorant bigot ass it was already thousands of years old when Mohammed was born huh Sparky??

Once again you have nothing but vague wisps of disjointed suspicions. "Has Islam fingerprints all over it". Suck my ass, you ignorant swine.

How many times have we spelled this shit out while you bigots go ?

>> In many Arab countries, the practice of honour killing dates back to pre-Islamic times when Arab settlers occupied a region adjacent to Sindh, known as Baluchistan (in Pakistan).57 These Arab settlers had patriarchal traditions such as live burials of newly born daughters. Such traditions trace back to the earliest historic times of Ancient Babylon, where the predominant view was that a woman's virginity belonged to her family.58

There is no mention of honour killing in the Quran or Hadiths. Honour killing, in Islamic definitions, refers specifically to extra-legal punishment by the family against a woman, and is forbidden by the Sharia (Islamic law). Religious authorities disagree with extra punishments such as honour killing and prohibit it, so the practice of it is a cultural and not a religious issue. However, since Islam has influence over vast numbers of Muslims in many countries and from many cultures, some use Islam to justify honour killing even though there is no support for honour killing in Islam. << -- Origins of Honor Killing​

Where's your link to "fingerprints", Iggie-boy?

You want an demon -- go for the patriarchy that creates this shit.

-- or would that hit too close to home?

I dont' give a fuck that you think forms of murder existed before Islam. That's obvious to anyone with half a brain. The reality is Islam fosters these killings. So, save us your dumbass history lesson, sparky.

Fortunately, those of us with complete brains have a right hemisphere, which gives us the context, which tells us an ancient cultural artifact that has been recorded all over the world from ancient Rome to the Aztec empire, and still goes on prominently in the Subcontinent today (where its perps happen to be Hindus and Sikhs) cannot possibly have had any kind of roots in "Islam".

The Holey Babble story referenced in the OP --- in which Jesus walks up to stop a stoning about to take place --- in itself tells us it was already extant THEN --- some six centuries before Mohammad was even born.

Linear time, vacuum-brain.

Incidentally it's not a "history lesson" as much as Anthropology. But the fact that you regard such crucial background info as "dumb" and would rather run with hair-on-fire bigotry because your head isn't big enough to accommodate realities, just confirms my signline all over again.

I really hate to break this to you, okay maybe not. But OP-ED means OPINE-EDITORIAL and those do NOT require links. You cannot link a thought.

And I hate to break it to you Pinko but the OP starts with a reference to an event with no link, and therefore no basis, and therefore no definition. Without a definition it cannot serve as a basis.

Moreover that citation contained an analysis (religion as causation) which I suspected was erroneous, and now with Gasbag's link that erronity has been confirmed.

Low hangin' fruit. Yum.

An OP-ED does not require being confirmed. Only spoken/written.

The story claimed to be an event in it, however, does. Else it's not an event.

I didn't even address the op-ed part of the OP. At all. Wasn't interested in that.

You meant to deflect like a little bitch maggot that you are.

Hey Gasbag ----

36 simultaneous tsunamis have wiped out the city of Port Fart, Idaho. This opened up a crevice in the continental shelf that sent the entire slab of western North America out to the Pacific Ocean where it declared itself the independent country of Canadifornia and launched five nukes at your house three minutes ago.

I don't have a link though.

You buyin'? Or are you gonna "deflect" asking for "evidence"?

Better run, dumbass.

Who at any time said that stonings didn't take place before Islam? Is that issue? No. You want to make it the issue though to ignore the real issue(s). Just like you want to trifle over links (habitually) to avoid the issue(s). Your game is stale and old. If you don't like being called out, address the actual issue at hand for once.