Posted on 09/26/2003 9:58:34 AM PDT by Chapita
The alleged criminal was spared a stoning, but the truth took it right on the snout.
Amina Lawal, a young Nigerian mother living under Islamic law (Sharia), had been sentenced to death by stoning, condemned to death for adultery.
Twelve states of Nigeria are governed by Sharia.
Nine days after giving birth, Amina Lawal was arrested. Although it takes two to make a baby, her partner, merely denied his involvement, even though Miss Lawal had said he had promised to marry her. He, too, would have received the stoning sentence, but under the Sharia his denial was virtually all that was needed to absolve him of all involvement. He was exonerated due to lack of evidence while Miss Lawal received a sentence to be stoned until "all life leaves her body."
Even Nigeria's Christian president, Olusegun Obasanjo, a Christian, had said he expected the decision would not stand. But aware of the difficulty an outspoken stand would have on his country's Islamic northern region, he declined to be outspoken in his defense of Miss Lawal.
An Islamic appeals court did overturn the sentence, perhaps aware that the case had generated worldwide protest, decided to overturn the sentence on procedural grounds, conceding that Miss Lawal had not been given "ample opportunity to defend herself." This, despite the fact that the letter of the Sharia completely disallows the victim's testimony in such a case.
In reporting the case the day before the appeals court made its ruling, MSNBC's Kari Huss stated that there is "a healthy debate among Islamic scholars" about what Mohammad would have said about such sentences. "Stoning is not mentioned in the Koran, experts agree," wrote Huss, and it is debatable whether Muhammad intended it for adultery.
Robert Spencer, Adjunct Fellow at the Free Congress Foundation, and the author of Women and Islam and the recently published, Onward Muslim Soldiers: How Jihad Still Threatens America and the West disagrees. He is one expert who does not fall for the whitewashing of Islam in regard to its treatment of women.
Spencer says it is absolutely misleading to suggest, as Huss' story did, that simply because stoning is not mentioned in the Qur'an, the words of the Prophet Mohammad can easily be set aside. Islamic theology holds that if Muhammad said it, then his words are to be given almost as much respect as if God himself had said it.
Traditions of Muhammad (Hadith) are second in authority only to the Qur'an itself for Muslims. One well-attested hadith from Sahih Bukhari, a source that Muslims around the world consider the most reliable for hadith -- even says that the punishment of stoning for adultery was originally in the "Book of Allah," the Qur'an, and that it is "prescribed" by Allah: "Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) awarded the punishment of stoning to death (to the married adulterer and adulteress) and, after him, we also awarded the punishment of stoning, I am afraid that with the lapse of time, the people (may forget it) and may say: 'We do not find the punishment of stoning in the Book of Allah,' and thus go astray by abandoning this duty prescribed by Allah. Stoning is a duty laid down in Allah's Book for married men and women who commit adultery when proof is established, or if there is pregnancy, or a confession." (Sahih Muslim, book 17, number 4194)
In the Qur'an as it stands today, it's true, the punishment for adultery is left somewhat open-ended. Sura 4:15 directs that women who are "guilty of lewdness" are to be confined to their houses until death, unless Allah finds for them "some (other) way." But traditional Muslims do not regard this open-endedness as an invitation to change Islamic law about adultery, because another respected hadith fills in this Qur'anic blank. It explains that the "other way" referred to in Sura 4:15 was later given by Allah to Muhammad, and it was stoning. In this hadith, the Muslim Prophet falls into the state that often accompanies his revelations from Allah and then exclaims: "Verily Allah has ordained a way for them (the women who commit fornication): (when) a married man (commits adultery) with a married woman, and an unmarried male with an unmarried woman, then in case of married (persons) there is (a punishment) of one hundred lashes and then stoning (to death)."
It is also significant that there was a dissenting opinion in the decision to overturn Miss Lawal's conviction. Judge Sule Sada had argued that given Miss Lawal's confession, the conviction was indeed merited.
Time and again, the news media and academia in the West insist on putting the most peaceful and tolerant face on Islam. Multiculturalism blinds us to the elements of the religion that are anything but peaceful and tolerant -- elements that are base on literal interpretations of some of its key texts. This case drew widespread public outrage and was overturned. But Justice loses more often than it triumphs in such cases. So-called "honor killings" are a frequent occurrence in many Middle Eastern countries, and a law stiffening penalties for them in Jordan was recently rejected on Islamic grounds.
Many millions of Muslims and the governing institutions that they live under are faithful in their adherence to Sharia. That was not good news for Miss Lawal. Nor is it good news for the many who could find themselves running afoul of the Islamic laws they are forced to live under. Nor is it for the West.
It's time Americans take a much needed look at Islam, what it is really about and how its theology is very different than the Judeo-Christian tradition.
Paul M. Weyrich is Chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation.
But Islam.....Islam is inherently evil.
We are living in the 9th Crusades and the West and Far East need to get their butts in gear.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.