Allowing child molesters in church?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi Muslimwoman and thanks for your post,

Here I go again. It is Islam.

In a belt that stretches from West Africa to Indonesia hundreds of thousands of people lose their lives every year in the furthering of Islamic law. This is because Islam is not merely a religion, a code for morality, but a political institution.

You wish to separate out your ideal vision of Islam as a peaceful code for living in accord with Allahs will to acheive salvation in the everafter. Thats what Islam is to you. That is not what Islam is. Islam is what is perpetrated in its name. It is suicide bombers targeting schools in Iraq. It is militias in Sudan slaughtering whole villages. Its is the rape and murder of indiginous islanders throughout Indonesia. It is murder and enslavemt in Algeria. It is brutal sharia law in Nigeria. Execution of independently minded women in Saudia Arabia. Gang murder of Buddhists in Thailand. And on and on and on. This is what Islam is. And just because you choose to peer from behind rose coloured spectacles at you'r adopted faith does not make you an authority on what Islam is or is not.

As long as Islam is devided between extremists and appologists like yourself then it will continue to be dominated by the former. What Islam needs above all else is reformers and revisionists that have the courage to strike supremacy from it and most importantly to separate it from politics. But to my knowledge there are none. An so Islam will continue to be driven by extremists who will be met by extreme reactions from those outside Islam. All your painting of the 'beauty' of Islam is meaningless while so many people die terrible deaths every day in its name. And people like me will not, cannot, respect it and believe it to be a religion of peace while such attrocities continue.

No other religion in our time is responsible for such heinous acts against humanity. You keep saying it is not the fault of the religion but some interpretations you dont agree with. That is sheer irrelevancy. Islam is what is carried out in its name. Just because you choose not to see that does not stop it being a fact. I am unconcerned with drivel about an afterlife or judgement. To me they are both lies fostered by several religions in their 'fear' program. What concerns me are the facts here on Earth today and tomorrow for me, my children and my fellow man. So please dont cite me your get out clause.

Islamic countries I have visited: Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, Pakistan... and India and Thailand both have sizable Muslim populations. I was never in a Hilton, I lived simply usually staying at very cheap hotels and on many occasions enjoyed the hospitality of people I met. I have travelled widely in the developing world and I find it rather suprising that you would presume to know what I have done in my lifetime.

The paper you asked me for :

http://www2.hu-berlin.de/sexology/IES/egypt.html

TE
 
Tao et al,

I think we are going way past the original cocept of this thread...

Though passion is understood, it should not be here.

Tao, I think the "Saddam is Dead" thread in "Politics and Society" might bare better fruit for your thinking. ;)
 
Snoopy said:
Phew! Fortunately where it says in the contract "Do you wish to come back in another life?" I ticked the "No" box.

s.
Click to expand...

LMAO, hee hee. You won't have time anyway. you'll be shackled in hell having all sorts of horrid things done to you :D
 
MW, make your mind up: am I shackled in hell or being punished in the next life?

s.
 
Miss Amy said:
If the consequences are bad enough then people won't do the horrible things.
Click to expand...

In times past in the UK poor, starving people (pre-welfare state) had terrible punishments meted out to them by the powerful for crimes such as stealing animals for food.

When the starving poor saw the terrible consequences that followed if they were caught stealing they stopped committing the crimes and became good people until the day they died of starvation.

s.
 
it is technically 25 years, yet currently because of overcrowding in prison most life sentences are for fifteen years and many ppl can get out for good behaviour in 5-7 years... the Home Secretary has final power to impose a strict sentence, and ensure a person serves a full term, etc, but it's not that often the Sec of State intervenes... ppl who commit murder here are sometimes out after five years... hardly a life sentence...
 
OK Snoopy

I might have gone a bit far with the generalizations with that one but... I just don't think sometimes that the punichment fits the crime. I learned that in school... with children the puishment must fit the crime. If they hit someone you don't take away their lunch. Do you know what I mean. I think that way about life. The punishment of a few years in jail is not really anything compared to the damage that it caused the victim.

Is that a better way of explaining myself.
 
Miss Amy said:
Is that a better way of explaining myself.
Click to expand...

Erudition personified my dear.

Putting people in prison, depriving of them of their freedom is certainly punishment and one can debate what length of sentence is appropriate, but for me the more important question is why did they do what they did? Unless that question is addressed presumably once released, offenders of any crime are likely to re-offend. If someone commits a crime against me or my property (as has recently happened) ultimately I don’t want revenge, I don’t want them to be punished, I want them to not do what they did again, to me or anyone else. A tall order I know; but if prisons are only places for up-grading “skills” and increasing resentment and problems upon release, we are only creating more crime for the future. I think the UK locks up more of its citizens than anyone else in Europe, so do we have the safest, most law abiding society because of all this punishment we mete out?

edit: just noticed your location; in case you didn't realise it this question is meant to be rhetorical (in spite of the spin of Tony Blair)


s.
 
Snoopy said:
Erudition personified my dear.

Putting people in prison, depriving of them of their freedom is certainly punishment and one can debate what length of sentence is appropriate, but for me the more important question is why did they do what they did? Unless that question is addressed presumably once released, offenders of any crime are likely to re-offend. If someone commits a crime against me or my property (as has recently happened) ultimately I don’t want revenge, I don’t want them to be punished, I want them to not do what they did again, to me or anyone else.
Click to expand...

I agree . Hate the sin, not the sinner. I think psychological treatment, yoga, meditation in prisons can help the criminal to get rid of his negative subconscious tendencies and violence, which is manifesting outside.
 
The paedophiles that commit crime after crime are well recognised to be well near untreatable. They will happily go through all the programs the shrinks dream up for them as long as it enables them to be free of jail. But its a sham. There are genuinely remorseful perverts in jail that state quite plainly that they should never be released. And even a small risk is a risk too far considering the potential harm they can do on release. Any serial child rapist should never be released.
 
Tao_Equus said:
The paedophiles that commit crime after crime are well recognised to be well near untreatable. They will happily go through all the programs the shrinks dream up for them as long as it enables them to be free of jail. But its a sham. There are genuinely remorseful perverts in jail that state quite plainly that they should never be released. And even a small risk is a risk too far considering the potential harm they can do on release. Any serial child rapist should never be released.
Click to expand...

But where does one draw the line? First time, second, third? And what is pedophilia? When a 14 year old loses virginity? What if the "culprit" is 14 years old as well?

What if a boy and girl have grown up together, and he (being 19), sleeps with her (being 17)?

Not trying to cause trouble (if I had a daughter, she wouldn't be allowed to date until she was 30), just asking some hard questions...

v/r

Joshua
 
Perhaps an examination of the connection between moralistic sexual repression and sexual deviance would suggest an enlightened approach to reducing paedophilia.
 
Quahom1 said:
But where does one draw the line? First time, second, third? And what is pedophilia? When a 14 year old loses virginity? What if the "culprit" is 14 years old as well?

What if a boy and girl have grown up together, and he (being 19), sleeps with her (being 17)?

Not trying to cause trouble (if I had a daughter, she wouldn't be allowed to date until she was 30), just asking some hard questions...

v/r

Joshua
Click to expand...

There was a time when it was common for men to have sexual relations with very young girls. The Prophet Muhammed's wife Aisha was six when he took her in marriage, and nine when he consumated that marriage. This was not unusual at the time.
 
Sunny C. said:
There was a time when it was common for men to have sexual relations with very young girls. The Prophet Muhammed's wife Aisha was six when he took her in marriage, and nine when he consumated that marriage. This was not unusual at the time.
Click to expand...

Hi Sunny

There is actually quite good evidence that she may have been as old as 16 when they finally consumated the marriage (this comes from accounts of her sister explaining where they were at the time and we know which battles etc took place when). Realise what you are saying though and you are quite correct, times have changed.

As for what constitues a child molester Quahom, it is a tough one to know where to draw the line. A 50 year old man and a 5 year old is a clear cut case but teenagers together is rather diferent, especially in this day and age. I have read of 17 year old boys being arrested for having sex with their 15 year old girlfriend and I do think how silly but the line must be drawn somewhere and we should teach our kids why they should not cross that line. What about a 20 year old and a 14 year old? Many 14 yr old girls look old enough but what about when the man is 25 and she is 14, does that start to sound creepy? So do we judge by when a girl physically devlopes? At 9 years I was 5'7" tall, my feet and boobs were the same size as my Mums and I had started my monthly's, whereas many of my friends still looked like little girls? Obviously society must draw a line by age, as we all develope at different speeds and I do agree with the court system of taking it case by case when it comes to teenagers but on the whole all I believe we can do is set a limit and prosecute when the line is crossed.
 
Muslimwoman said:
Hi Sunny

There is actually quite good evidence that she may have been as old as 16 when they finally consumated the marriage (this comes from accounts of her sister explaining where they were at the time and we know which battles etc took place when). Realise what you are saying though and you are quite correct, times have changed.

As for what constitues a child molester Quahom, it is a tough one to know where to draw the line. A 50 year old man and a 5 year old is a clear cut case but teenagers together is rather diferent, especially in this day and age. I have read of 17 year old boys being arrested for having sex with their 15 year old girlfriend and I do think how silly but the line must be drawn somewhere and we should teach our kids why they should not cross that line. What about a 20 year old and a 14 year old? Many 14 yr old girls look old enough but what about when the man is 25 and she is 14, does that start to sound creepy? So do we judge by when a girl physically devlopes? At 9 years I was 5'7" tall, my feet and boobs were the same size as my Mums and I had started my monthly's, whereas many of my friends still looked like little girls? Obviously society must draw a line by age, as we all develope at different speeds and I do agree with the court system of taking it case by case when it comes to teenagers but on the whole all I believe we can do is set a limit and prosecute when the line is crossed.
Click to expand...

Yeah kiddo, I pretty much agree on all counts expressed here. Like I said, I was just asking questions. And I'm relieved to see I'm not alone in my thinking. :eek:
 
Sunny C. said:
There was a time when it was common for men to have sexual relations with very young girls. The Prophet Muhammed's wife Aisha was six when he took her in marriage, and nine when he consumated that marriage. This was not unusual at the time.
Click to expand...
Awwhh, Sunny. That is information I really didn't need to know. :eek:
 
Tao_Equus said:
The paedophiles that commit crime after crime are well recognised to be well near untreatable. They will happily go through all the programs the shrinks dream up for them as long as it enables them to be free of jail. But its a sham. There are genuinely remorseful perverts in jail that state quite plainly that they should never be released. And even a small risk is a risk too far considering the potential harm they can do on release. Any serial child rapist should never be released.
Click to expand...


Maybe so Tao, but I believe there must be certain psychological reasons for these paedophiles to commit the crime , perhaps biological reasons as well.
As a wise friend of mine has said ," It was once thought that all men and women were heterosexual by nature, and that it was only their willful, evil nature that caused them to take up homosexual practices. So of course, the "fundamentals" of religion carried bans against those practices. Now, it is very well understood by everyone actually working in the human psychological and sexual sciences that homosexuality is a naturally-occuring and basically unalterable orientation. "

I am not saying that paedophilia is a naturally-occuring orientation,but perhaps there could indeed be some psychological and biological , even genetical reasons involved.

Not only punishment , but maybe a cure for this should also be studied and investigated into.

In Indian and certain american prisons, certain spiritual organisations taught yoga and meditation to the criminals . After a few months of practice, dramatic changes was noticed in the behaviour of the prisoners, who became more positive, non-violent, calmer, and peaceful.

This was particularly evident in India in the prisons run by Indias female supercop Kiran Bedi, who brought meditation and yoga teachers to the prisons to teach the prisoners yoga.And the results were very encouraging, which has created a trend now in India.

Kiran Bedi - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Vipassana - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So you can see from this that the criminal's character can indeed be changed.
 
niranjan said:
In Indian and certain american prisons, certain spiritual organisations taught yoga and meditation to the criminals . After a few months of practice, dramatic changes was noticed in the behaviour of the prisoners, who became more positive, non-violent, calmer, and peaceful.
Click to expand...

This sounds interesting Niranjan, is there any scientific evidence or studies to show that this method can change the way the mind of someone like a child molester thinks?

I am just wondering if it just makes people calmer or if it can actually change the way a mind works. I have also seen these men ask not to be let of prison because they seem unable to control the impulses, so I just wonder if this method could actually change those impulses?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top