Gang raped by 7 men? That's 200 lashes

Originally Posted by Bradylama

Whether or not the rapists have actually been punished is immaterial to the case at hand. Don't be a retard. The issue involves a woman who was raped being beaten by her government for it.

No it doesn't, because that's not why she was punished. The original sentence was for being in the company of a male she was unrelated to. Such a fact isn't really made clear in that article. Chiribo is right; the facts are taking a back seat to CNNs Islam bashing.

How ya doing, buddy?

You're saying a law against woman being in the company of an unrelated male is as reprehensible as a law prescribing punishments for victims of rape?

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Where did I say that? You're honestly telling me you couldn't rank one of those scenarios as being worse than the other?

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Devoxycontin

She was kidnapped though, so basically she's being punished for what?

Before she was kidnapped, she met with a man in his car. That's the crime. The man was kidnapped too.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Originally Posted by Devoxycontin

How is that any less backwards? Male companionship? You're a whore!

Someone points out you had the facts wrong, but you steadfastly stick to your guns and proclaim 'We don't care for your facts! The facts change nothing!'. You know how annoying that is, when my main reason for posting was just to make sure everyone had the correct story?

Anyway

"How is that any less backward". Well let me have a go at this. The woman knows the law and she can play by the rules. She doesn't. She knows she's breaking the law, she does it anyway. She's punished for it. Yeah, they're backward rules but 'sup Islam. Scenario 2. The woman is kidnapped and raped, she has no power or self-determination over what happens to her. She's punished for it.

Neither you nor Denicalis can see one is quite clearly worse than the other?

And you can't understand that an article written to make it seem like B happened, when it was actually A that happened, is many times more incendiary and provactive to people like you who need any excuse to get up and posture on a soapbox? It is irresponsible journalism, and the second reason I posted.

I was speaking idiomatically.

You must admit, there are examples of woman lacking rights in Islamic countries, that are graver and more shocking than some other examples.

Would the original poster have angered just as many people into viewing/posting if the title of this thread had been 'Woman not allowed driving licenses in Saudi Arabia'? I personally think the reaction would have been somewhat more muted.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Is this my 'Lurker's stern talking down to'?

FELIPE NO