Abu Dhabi: A teenage girl will receive 60 lashes for having illicit sex with a man, the Federal Supreme Court has confirmed.
The girl, identified as R.A., who was 14 -years-old when the incident occurred, had sex with a man, identified as H.S. R.A. had been meeting with H.S. in secret, she told the public prosecution. The prosecution accused the two of adultery and khulwa [illegally staying together in a private place without being related].
The Al Ain court of First Instance sentenced R.A. to 60 lashes. It also sentenced H.S. to six months in jail but acquitted him of adultery for lack of evidence.
52 comments
Just one question to this stupid barbarians. If the girl was not married, in which sense she comitted adultery?, moreover, if you acquited her lover due to lack of evidence, why is the girl still guilty?, you need two to tango, you know.
If you acquited her lover due to lack of evidence, why is the girl still guilty?
I was going to ask just that same thing.
Waitwaitwait... the guy was acquitted due to "lack of evidence."
So... what evidence did you have to punish the girl, then?
Or did someone just decide to whip her because they felt like it?
How old is the guy? In some countries, he would end up in jail for statutory rape!
Nuke the middle east! I hope that was sarcasm! (just in case it wasn't: What makes it ok for fundie christians to STONE women to death for adultry and when moslims do pretty much the same thing it's atrocious?!)
"So shouldn't she be acquitted too?"
I think it's because a female's testimony has half the value of a male's in court. She 'confessed', which has lead to her receiving sixty lashes, and he probably denied it, leading to her testimony not being accepted in his trial.
This is a judicial/legal issue, not a religious issue.
The fact that the UAE is predominantly muslim has as much bearing on the case as the US having the death penalty and being a predominantly christian country.
@ BunyipGirl: not quite;
"federal court system introduced in 1971; applies to all emirates except Dubayy (Dubai) and Ra's al Khaymah, which are not fully integrated into the federal judicial system; all emirates have secular courts to adjudicate criminal, civil, and commercial matters and Islamic courts to review family and religious disputes". On the UAE from the CIA World Fact Book.
I would guess that this matter falls under family/religious...
It's adultery because it was sex outside of marriage. Obviously, she was the evil one who lead the man to sin.
"If you acquited her lover due to lack of evidence, why is the girl still guilty?"
Duh. She's a girl. That means she's guilty. Women aren't human, ya know. There just there for us men.
It's barbaric and stupid.
Her guilt would have been confirmed by checking to see if she was still a virgin (i.e. intact hymen). Never mind the fact that there are several reasons, most of them non-sexual, why her hymen would not be intact.
Since no such test exists for a man, his guilt couldn't be proven conclusively. Her word, under their ridiculous laws, was worthless.
To think that there are idiot fundies in the USA that would like that kind of system of laws for America.
Even if he wasn't judged to be guilty of adultery he still gets 6 months in jail. The woman isn't the only one who got punished. At least that is how I read it, it is a bit insane to sentence him to jail for 6 months only to declare him innocent of the crime by the same court in the same ruling. So even if the reasoning for the punishment is weird (she had illegal sex but he didn't), he doesn't get away free.
Sex outside marriage is fornication, not adultery. So, it can only be adultery if she's married(not he, since in those countries a married man himself is never an adulterer). And concerning again the girl, if her lover was acquinted, with whom she commited adultery?, with the air?, you need two people for that.
BunyipGirl -
It most certainly has to do with fundamentalist religion for a few reasons:
1) The law prohibiting adultery, and defining such a punishment for it, is rooted in Shariah law.
2) The fact that the man was even sentenced to a much lesser sentence (6 months in jail vs. 60 lashes with a whip) is testimony to its religious roots. That he was acquited due to "lack of evidence" is further demonstration of it.
"If the girl was not married, in which sense she comitted adultery?"
The article doesn't say the young girl was single. She might have been in an arranged marriage, which doesn't exactly lead to romantic loyalty...
Fucking hell, think this is bad? In Iran, they whip, and even KILL, rape victims.
God, I can't understand this mindset. It's so barberic, misogynistic and just vile.
But let's not forget - a Hell of a lot of Dominionists want this in Western countries. Their reasons are the same. I'm even more disgusted by this because in the UK lessened the prison sentence for a child rapist because the girl was "dressed provocatively". *Sigh* - my faith in humanity is really hanging by a thread.
That is as so backwards and wrong.
I mean, that would be as asanine as the V.P. of the United States saying that he isn't part of the executive branch. I mean, that's just plain ole crazy.
One book spawns countless religions including christianity, islam, judaism, jehovah's witness' and mormonism, and leads to the subjugation and inhumane treatment for thousands of years. And half of the world thinks this is a good plan.
@Papabear said:
She can't be any more guilty than her lover. Period.
Unfortunatly most religions figure she is more guilty than her lover, because she HAS a period.
This is a reprehensible verdict, but it's no reason to nuke the UAE or any other country.
We need to convince such countries to abolish these laws peacefully, not through threat of force. If we were told, "Change your legal system or we'll nuke you," do you think we would knuckle under?
Tere is no longer anything the US can do about Iran. It is beyond their control. The west had their chance, and the CIA was so obsessed with 'containing communism'- by creating fascist dictatorships, and funding terrorists, while ignoring the presidents wishes- you get theocracies in Iran - even though the person previous to the Shah was fine, and the Shah was too much of opressive fool to keep public support, but not enough of one to do a Mustafa Kemal and de-religiousize the country or an bloody China and Tianamen their idiotic asses, or a CIA and SHOOT AYATOLLA KHOMEINEI WHEN HE HAD HIM IN CUSTODY OR GET FRANCE (where he was living) TO DO IT, thereby forcibly keeping control (worked in Israel) - the Americans kicked out the previous guy FOR NO REASON- Palestine: years of west-funded agression has led them -democratically, remember- into idiotic theocracy and a circle of violence, and Africa, where we just couldn't care less.
Now America is the 'Great Satan' and these scum are in power, we can't work with them, and by working against them we only strengthen their position. We had our chance to civilize the legal/political systems of the countries, to base them on FACTS (Iran does not allow DNA checks in Rape cases, and requires several male witnesses to prove the crime, and without them the victim is whipped) and to create an effective education and economy for these countries. Instead of turning to communism because the west wouldn't help, they turned to something much worse- theocracies. We are screwed.
"There is no longer anything the US can do about Iran"
It didn't happen in Iran, but in the United Arab Emirates...
Lt. Fred:
Is Mustafa Kemal an oppressive dictator to lessen Islamic fundies' control?
I owe my secular life to him. Not to mention all the people supported his decisions to kick the beardie fundies out of office and use European clothes and equipment. Better off, that's what I say.
I'm glad I'll never be under an Islamic theocracy...
How old is the guy? In some countries, he would end up in jail for statutory rape!
Which, in my opinion, would be every bit as barbaric.
Stupid barbarians. I would like to give all the women in those countries AK-47's so they could blast away those evil misogynist f***ers. The sad thing is that they probably have never been exposed to the concept of personal rights and freedoms.
If hell were real, I would hope that it would be like the description of hell in the movie "Little Nikki" and that these s***heads would get a pineapple up the ass for eternity. But now I am just being irrational...
Hey, I'm a great fan of Mustafa, I can see where he's coming from - but he didn't do what everyone wanted, and therefore was kinda sorta undemocratic.
Still should have done it though- although banning hats was a bit much. I mean, they're hat, what harm can they do?
I know I'm resurrecting an old thread, but I don't even understand this. He was sentenced but acquitted? What does that mean? Does he go to jail or not?
And why are there two different - but both inhumane - punishments here?
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.