As reported by CNN, at any moment now a woman in Iran—a mother of two—could be buried up to her chest and stoned to death, using stones “not so large as to kill her immediately.”
Her alleged crime? She was convicted—without a single witness—of adultery, which is a capital offense in Iran, a nation whose laws reflect Bronze Age religious morality, and whose justice system functions most decidedly against women.
Obviously, the civilized world—all those who have evolved beyond ideas hatched in ancient ignorance—is outraged and is attempting to pressure the Iranians to stop the execution of Sakineh Ashtiani.
Our own State Department, perhaps in an effort to avoid forcing the Iranian’s hands, has not exactly expressed outrage at the possibility that in the year 2010, a nation that once was part of the modern world could bury a woman in the ground and brutally murder her with stones for an alleged adulterous affair:
“We have grave concerns that the punishment does not fit the alleged crime, ” Assistant Secretary of State P.J. Crowley said Thursday. “For a modern society such as Iran, we think this raises significant human rights concerns.”
“Grave concerns” and “raises significant human rights concerns“? Look, I understand that diplomats in the State Department specialize in rounding off the corners of controversies, but should the execution actually take place, something more reflective of our outrage should emanate from the top of Foggy Bottom.
In any case, what makes the execution of Sakineh Ashtiani possible is not just the awful reality of Islamic law, but a stubborn refusal to acknowledge that the age-old, infallible “truths” handed down by God were not in fact handed down by God and therefore not infallible.
That fact is something which religious conservatives everywhere have trouble digesting.
Here is the CNN report:
Vodpod videos no longer available.
The Erstwhile Conservative: A Blog of Repentance 
johnnykaje
/ July 6, 2010I was watching a Jimmy Carter video yesterday where he talked about religion and violations of women’s rights. His conclusion is the most obvious one: the former is the main dispatcher of the latter.
It’s not a popular concept, even in modern feminist circles, that the Abrahamic religions (not to mention others) are inherently anti-woman. There are feminist theologians who try to “reclaim” them, but in order to do so you basically have to butcher it until it’s unrecognizable.
LikeLike
ansonburlingame
/ July 7, 2010To anyone interested,
Now go watch the foreign film “The Stoning of Sonyara M.” a true story according to the film. It brings home in vivid imagery what is being discussed above, including a gruesome portrayl of the execution.
Then go watch a film showing people that happened to be Jewish shoved into “showers” and the subsequent “ovens”. Yes, the number of Jews killed by Nazi Germany is far more than the women stoned under Shari Law, but try telling that to the women of Iran or Afghanistan.
Is this something to “fight” about or just wring our hands and “hope” that diplomacy solves the problem?
I don’t have the exact answer but it sure brings home the chickens as far as at least part of our motivation in the War on Terror. Now what do YOU propose to do about it, besides watch CNN and “commiserate”?
Anson
LikeLike
ansonburlingame
/ July 7, 2010One more question. What happens if/when Iran achieves “nuclear status” (weapons) to defend their “National Intersts” including Shari Law. And why in the world do we have an allie (Saudia Arabia) that practices the same thing (sans CNN coverage)?
Anson
LikeLike