Sharia punishments are the best to deter all sorts of crimes.

[saqibmkhan]

PTI government must implement Sharia punishments to deter and stop civil and immoral crimes that affect the safety and security of women, vulnerable children, and the elderly by the unruly, licentious, and lewd mob or an individual in public or within the four walls of a home. I honestly believe and am of the firm opinion that convicted paedophiles, child molesters, child kidnappers, rapists, and sodomists must be publicly hanged. And public harassment, groping and grabbing girls and women in public parks, shopping malls, bazaars, travelling on public transport, rickshaws, and walking on the streets should be punished by public whipping as prescribe in the Sharia Laws.

The idea of some of the severe Islamic punishments is to deter crime so that the criminals and vagabonds do not pollute society and threaten in any way lives of their fellow law-abiding citizens to live a normal life.

 

[Mulhid]

Brutal punishments do not deter crime, they lead to more violent crimes. Hardened criminals are not detered by punishments.

And even if you want harsh punishments, you can do that without Sharia law because Sharia law comes with its baggage such as legalising slavery and buying and selling of sex slaves, womens testimony being equal to half of man and women being second class citizens.

 

[Visionartist]

IMportant is the man who sits on chair.
e.g. See the situation of our supreme court. Many judges have been awarded plots in a neat and clean draw.
do you expect any decision against government from these judges?

 

[StarTrooper]

IMportant is the man who sits on chair.
e.g. See the situation of our supreme court. Many judges have been awarded plots in a neat and clean draw.
do you expect any decision against government from these judges?

Everyone who you do not like is corrupt . Punishments in every law are based on evidence even in Shariya law

Problem is evidences can be manipulated. Under Shariya law every other day a hand of a poor will be cut off even if he did not steel while rich and powerful will still be enjoying on looted money

 

[Munawarkhan]

I don’t know why people argue on topics where they have no knowledge .

The funniest part is when you write “Shariah Law"
because shariah means law

 

[rahail]

Brutal punishments do not deter crime, they lead to more violent crimes. Hardened criminals are not detered by punishments.

And even if you want harsh punishments, you can do that without Sharia law because Sharia law comes with its baggage such as legalising slavery and buying and selling of sex slaves, womens testimony being equal to half of man and women being second class citizens.

Sharia is Law. A way better law than puny western laws. And When you don't know about things, do not comment. You make yourself look fool.

 

[Citizen X]

PTI government must implement Sharia punishments to deter and stop civil and immoral crimes that affect the safety and security of women, vulnerable children, and the elderly by the unruly, licentious, and lewd mob or an individual in public or within the four walls of a home. I honestly believe and am of the firm opinion that convicted paedophiles, child molesters, child kidnappers, rapists and sodomists must be publicly hanged. And public harassment, groping and grabbing girls and women in public parks, shopping malls, bazaars, travelling on public transport, rickshaws and walking on the streets should be punished by public whipping as prescribe in the Sharia Law.

The idea of some of the severe Islamic punishments is to deter crime so that the criminals and vagabonds do not pollute society and threaten in any way lives of their fellow law-abiding citizens to live a normal life.

Problem is people have no clue about shariah, most of it today is derived from man made books, a very tiny miniscule percentage is actually taken from book of Allah.

 

[Citizen X]

Everyone who you do not like is corrupt . Punishments in every law are based on evidence even in Shariya law

Problem is evidences can be manipulated. Under Shariya law every other day a hand of a poor will be cut off even if he did not steel while rich and powerful will still be enjoying on looted money

Thats the problem. Extremist wahabis have their own interpretations of it. And majority of it not even from the Quran, most is based on loose, weak and fabricated hadith.

This punishment is for criminals whose profession is to steal, rob and make a living and get rich out it. Not the poor who out of no choice are forced to steal, in a proper Islamic society it is the rulers duty to see everyone's basic needs are provided for.

 

[Mulhid]

Sharia is Law. A way better law than puny western laws. And When you don't know about things, do not comment. You make yourself look fool.

Its a backward law which allows slavery and rape of women. It also makes women second class citizens.

 

[Mulhid]

Problem is people have no clue about shariah, most of it today is derived from man made books, a very tiny miniscule percentage is actually taken from book of Allah.

The problem with Ghamdi's ideas is that there is no clear laws in Quran. And even Quran is man made based on what people had memorized same was as hadiths were memorized. I would argue that Hadiths hold more weight than certain verses of Quran because atleast in case of Hadiths there was some verification and methodology but in Quran there was none. Certain verses were only narrated by one or two individuals and no one else and there are no sanads for any verses of Quran, so how do we know what those people were writing down after death of Muhammad were actual verses as revealed to Muhammad and not something they made up like they made up hadiths? Even the people who were incharge of compiling like Umar and Usman had not memorized the Quran.

 

[Citizen X]

The problem with Ghamdi's ideas is that there is no clear laws in Quran. And even Quran is man made based on what people had memorized same was as hadiths were memorized. I would argue that Hadiths hold more weight than certain verses of Quran because atleast in case of Hadiths there was some verification and methodology but in Quran there was none. Certain verses were only narrated by one or two individuals and no one else and there are no sanads for any verses of Quran, so how do we know what those people were writing down after death of Muhammad were actual verses as revealed to Muhammad and not something they made up like they made up hadiths? Even the people who were incharge of compiling like Umar and Usman had not memorized the Quran.

Well being an atheist/agnostic, that's your opinion and you are entitled to it.

 

[Mulhid]

Well being an atheist/agnostic, that's your opinion and you are entitled to it.

Its not an opinion. Its a question. The compilation of Quran and hadith was done by humans thats a fact that we can both agree on. If they make up stuff in one they can make it up in the other too. We have no complete Quran from Usman's time to compare the modern Quran to. There is no chain of narration in Quran and no way for us to verify it but for hadiths there is chain of narration.

MBS is also going to take Ghamdi line now and the reason is Quran is a very ambiguos book and there are no clear laws in Quran, which means he can use it to justify any law he wants to make. Quran cannot substitute hadith because there is no Islam in the Quran. It only mentions 4 prayers and no clear methods, rules or laws for anything. The word Islam itself is mentioned less than 9 times and barely any mention of Muhammad (4-5 mentions?), who he was, where he lived, what he did. If you take Hadith out there is no Islam.

 

[Citizen X]

Its not an opinion. Its a question. The compilation of Quran and hadith was done by humans thats a fact that we can both agree on. If they make up stuff in one they can make it up in the other too. We have no complete Quran from Usman's time to compare the modern Quran to. There is no chain of narration in Quran and no way for us to verify it but for hadiths there is chain of narration.

MBS is also going to take Ghamdi line now and the reason is Quran is a very ambiguos book and there are no clear laws in Quran, which means he can use it to justify any law he wants to make. Quran cannot substitute hadith because there is no Islam in the Quran. It only mentions 4 prayers and no clear methods, rules or laws for anything. The word Islam itself is mentioned less than 9 times and barely any mention of Muhammad (4-5 mentions?), who he was, where he lived, what he did. If you take Hadith out there is no Islam.

I know you lot are raring to go 24/7 and just waiting for someone to bring this topic up so you can get it off your chests. Obviously you've made up your mind, and it was a long drawn out process and you did your research and came up with a conclusion that satisfied you. So there is nothing I can say or do that will change your mind, so why bother and I'm not really in the mood for a lengthy debate.

If you take Hadith out there is no Islam.

When in reality there is no Islam in hadith.

 

[saqibmkhan]

I don’t know why people argue on topics where they have no knowledge .

The funniest part is when you write “Shariah Law"
because shariah means law

Munawar Khan: Before you criticize anyone on any topic or subject, you must make sure that you are well educated and knowledgeable in the subject.

 

[Munawarkhan]

Munawar Khan: Before you criticize anyone on any topic or subject, you must make sure that you are well educated and knowledgeable in the subject.

I'm not the one preaching Sharia here, I just pointed out that the one doing doesn't even know meaning of it.

 

[saqibmkhan]

I'm not the one preaching Sharia here, I just pointed out that the one doing doesn't even know meaning of it.

You are subjective in your opinion and not objective. Please do not mislead the readers with your little knowledge.

 

[Munawarkhan]

You are subjective in your opinion and not objective. Please do not mislead the readers with your little knowledge.

how can you gauge what type of knowledge i carry?

 

[Citizen X]

You are subjective in your opinion and not objective. Please do not mislead the readers with your little knowledge.

Man you just like to say shit that you think sounds important and deep when in reality is just nonsensical gibberish. Go back to crying about why biden hasn't called Khan yet.

 

[saqibmkhan]

how can you gauge what type of knowledge i carry?

You may be a highly learned man but have demonstrated intellectual delinquency by mocking others' points of view.

 

[Munawarkhan]

You may be a highly learned man but have demonstrated intellectual delinquency by mocking others' points of view.

your point makes no sense. You are asking PTI should implement shariah.
Our courts & laws are based on Shariah. So you are asking to do something that already exists.

What do you wanna debate about?