Seventh Day Adventists don't eat pork.

And JWs iirc. There are a few others.

Remember a drug user needs a producer and dealer to get his/her fix. My concerns are dealer's who could care less about how they effect inner city communities and are responsible for a growing amount of violence. If we can effectively stop the producer of drugs which I think Sharia law does the best then there will be no drugs for the addict to seek. That being said I do not agree with a Taliban official (if this event occurred) executing a guy for having a drink. Maybe there was something more to the case like the guy was selling alcohol knowing that there is an Islamic ban on alcohol? So I would like to see some evidence of the case.

Either way if the Taliban did execute a man for simply having a drink it should be condemned IMO. But if a guy is selling a high amount of hardcore drugs like Opium I am going to agree with the Taliban's anti- drug Implementation. I think over 30,000 Russians died in 2007 from heroin mainly coming from Afghanistan so if that number of 30,000 dead could be greatly reduced I am all for the Taliban's anti-drug policy based on Sharia law

Here in the US from what I understand of the law a bar owner can be held liable for a patrons drunk driving. Its not a death sentence but its punishment for indirect involvement in an ongoing problem throughout the world. That being said I think the US drug and alcohol laws contradicts itself greatly and causes problems mainly for those without wealth, more problems then Sharia drug law. What is the point of slapping a drug kingpin on the wrist or even throwing him/her in jail when simply another person will take over?

So to me the drug/alcohol argument comes to three choices

A) Enforce a ban on drugs and alcohol with severe penalties and see how it effects the community (Sharia law does this), Are the benefits greater then the consequences ?

B) Allow the sale of all drugs/alcohol and see how it effects the community Are the benefits greater then the consequences ?

C) Do it the USA way and allow alcohol but punish certain drug users/dealers in the way we are currently doing so which leads to drug dealers being replaced by different ones. Are the benefits greater then the consequences ?

We know some Middle East countries which have Sharia law which says that choice A is the correct choice and I actually agree with this specific point irt alcohol/drug laws but I would want cannabis to be legal.

We also know that choice B and partially C will automatically have dire consequences and this is not an argument but rather a fact based on alcohol/drug related statistics throughout the years.

-Can choice B or C ever result in a better community then choice A ?

So if choice A is determined to be the best all around choice then it would be one crucial positive argument for Sharia law

It would be important to poll Libyans and see if a great majority would want Sharia law, for the record If the people of a nation want Sharia law then I am in agreement with it. If it is being forced unto a group of people I am against this. The correct followers of the Quran like Ali Montizari from Iran stress the equal treatment of even non People of the book based on teachings of the Quran and in turn Sharia law

I'll respond to your earlier comment later, but remember, even if 98% of a populace favoured a strict sharia implementation, the remaining 2% would still be oppressed non-consensually. Government-sanctioned oppression and moral enforcement on just one non-consenting person is still unacceptable. Therein lies the problem.

I'll put this down as you don't actually know how the Taliban stopped the drug trade but you just liked the results.

Yeah im not. They were brutal afaik, i could be wrong. But if you dont have the specifics on how they stopped the opium trade you should be careful about indorsing them or wanting to take some of their actions here.

Nope we are luckily going the other way towards legalization and the root of the problem, usage, and treatment to those who want it.


They already happen. We kick out violent criminals to house our drug dealers for long term sentencing. Our jails are full of drug dealers with long sentences. And like you pointed out earlier another one will pop up for everyone you jail. So i dont see how longer sentencing would put much of a dent in the problem.

Yeah i still dont know other then extending sentencing, which im not even sure the Taliban did.




My first drink, drug, was in church as a part of communion. Just a sip. But id have a hard time believing the Catholic church would give up wine in the communion. Wonder what they did during probation. Edit:ah exempt....



Im going to get out of the drug debate sidetrack though because i bore even myself with it.



Talk about punishment for adultery? I kid...

First off I welcome any criticism but I am surprised I have to "spell it out for you" as the saying goes. That being said I still don't think the US will ever legalize all drugs in our lifetime, cannabis(which I don't consider a drug) yes but meth and heroin I see as highly improbable.

The reason why I agree with destroying Opium fields and the death penalty for drug traffickers of opium/hardcore drugs is again b/c of the direct negative effects the Afgan Drug trade causes around the world. When it comes down to it drug dealers can be some of the worst people on the planet with a total disregard for human life. Homelessness caused by Heroin and 30,000 dead heroin addicts in Russia in one year is completely unacceptable in my mind. The opium drug trade in Afghanistan is carrying over to Iran where it is estimated there are over 2 million addicts over 2% of the population. The drug problem in Pakistan has reached levels never before seen


Batair you said it correctly yourself, that if a drug dealer here in the US with a certain amount of x drug gets arrested they will be given a prison sentence and another dealer will take over. The negative effects of heroin for instance in inner city communities in the US is really bad. And based on our current legal system nothing is changing, I cant see full legalization of all drugs in the US even tho I would want to in an effort to get rid of the black market drug dealers.

So if we cant fully legalize all drugs in the US how can we find it morally acceptable to allow the current drug dealers to continuously flourish at the price of human life. If we impose a death penalty for drug producers and those with high amounts of drugs we would significantly curb the deaths, violence, homelessness, and disparity that is taking place every day mostly in inner city communities. Basically herion dealers who could care less about customers dying would be risking life rather then doing a dime at some prison then getting out in a few years

Batair do you believe that the current US drug trade is responsible for human deaths and economic issues? Do you find it correct that current prison sentencing is not effective?

Obv the answers to both questions are yes so that being said If a high level crack dealer is caught with 20 pounds of uncut coke how would you handle the case?

Look I don't like the fact that drugs are not legal here in the US but I would like to see people stop dying and communities stop being destroyed, Sharia law aims to make communities a better place. It has its faults like any other system but its important to observe the benefits and see that a liberal type of Sharia law could be quite effective, its all about how its implemented

I may have been technically wrong about alcohol in Christianity but as for pork:

The Bible prohibits the consumption of pork, in the book of Leviticus

"And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be cloven footed, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you".

"Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcass shall ye not touch, they are unclean to you."

[Leviticus 11:7-8]

Pork is also prohibited in the Bible in the book of Deuteronomy

"And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you. Ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcass."

[Deuteronomy 14:8]

A similar prohibition is repeated in the Bible in the book of Isaiah chapter 65 verse 2-5.

ok, maybe the Heroin example was a bad one, and I think there's a lot of overspill from the the focus on shariah into Islam in general that I hadn't intended. Whilst I don't think the existence of shariah reflects well on Islam, I'd like to focus on shariah except for where the two can't be seperated.

It's been posited that societies under Shariah law may enjoy benefits that non-shariah societies don't, they may be more peaceful, there are fewer teenage pregnancies, there my be more 'respect' shown by members of the spciety to each other etc etc. I wonder if those specific issues mightn't simply be the result of the fear generated by the extreme measures that can be taken to punish misdemeanours under Shariah law and if that's true, is it really the best way to acheive them? Education might have the same effect but that's an area where I think shariah is particularly worthy of criticism. At what cost do you suspend critical thinking, particularly in children?

If your purpose in suppressing and censoring contrary information and only allowing children access to the information that you want them to believe, for the purposes of ensuring the continuity of your belief system and ensuring compliance, has the effect of suppressing critical thinking are those children not being 'used'? Is their autonomy and ability to decide for themselves how live their lives according to their own values being compromised and is that immoral?

Ive been asking you to spell it out so im not sure why you are surprised. You want the death penalty. Ok. Seems extreme and against Catholic teaching...

But heres the thing. You say you would go for legalization if that were possible. Its not right now. But neither is killing them. If anything id guess legalization is more possible then killing them. So why go there instead of pushing for the preferable pipe dream of legalization?

Self Defense is allowed in the teachings of Jesus, IMO its a form a defense against evil when executing a drug trafficker that is proven to be guilty, That same drug trafficker who is going to be responsible for human deaths

Although I did say I am catholic in the past few months I have attended a masjid(mosque) as much of my family is Muslim. What I can tell you is we have alot to learn from Islam but if you look into it you will start to see many great things

I wont continue on about the drug thing but I feel comfortable on how I argued my points of how Sharia law would better combat the horrific consequences of hard drugs in poor communities. Your making good points also but it just seems at this point were going back and fourth on one issue of the subject when we should concentrate on Sharia as a whole and how certain countries implement it and how it compares to other systems of law.

With over 1.5 billion Muslims in the world I'm also interested in a worldwide poll to see how many Muslims are in favor of some type of Shariah law.

There was a pew survey on the topic recently. I don't like polling or surveys because they are deeply flawed and reflect dishonest answers, but it's the best we have.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3186144

I dont think drug traffickers are evil, whether he is responsible for human deaths or not. But by your argument, we should execute anyone who does anything evil. This could include lying,stealing, taking the lords name in vain, etc, since this will also be a defense against evil.


As far as I can see, you havent argued any points on how sharia law would be better, other than to say "It would be better". Maybe you can reiterate some of the points as I might have missed them?

Self Defense, in regard to Jesus, is going to go back, past japan, and back through india. It does not suggest what your are going to finish this sentence with. Self defense, with is a very old phrase, although not in english, refers to a certain compassion towards our fellow man.

When we try to regulate our drug trades with harsh penalties, not only do we drive up prices (and create such an economy), but we also create violence as a result of suppression. It's not supposed to be you that thinks these are the solutions, its supposed to be those in power that think so 2 sided.

Its akin to cut off and sewing up all genitals to stop a rape epidemic and suggesting there is no better way.

Really we need to deal with and acknowledge real social issues, and spend the money from war and regulation on reform and rehabilitation. Parent countries, or 1st world countries need to support and integrate socially not come in with military/state control.

Its really only slighter different than you are suggesting...do what you will, but know that the enemy is our family and is just confused about what this is (while simultaneously admitting so are we all to some extent).

I never said that and would say you misunderstood my comment

Alright fair enough.

Love the feeling of being ignored in my own thread.

That's priceless, made me lol.

Maybe you can clarify then because to me you seemed to be saying

1)drug dealers are evil.
2)It is desirable to defend against evil.
3)One way to defend against evil is to execute evil doers.

If 2 and 3 are true, then any evil can be dealt with by this method.

did you want me to address something?

When I said "execute drug dealers to defend against evil" I was specifically referring to Opium and other hard drug Producers/dealers. Maybe I should have used a different word to avoid this.

Then again I could flip this on you and say if we don't think drug dealers are evil then by that definition murderers cant be evil, including some of histories greatest criminals maybe meaning there should be no punishment for crimes of any sorts. So we know someone who was responsible for 1 million deaths made bad choices, If the definition is not evil it still cant be good so then what is it?

Of course we are living in 2013 and in even Sharia law countries, executions are not taking place for someone saying God dament or using the lords name in vein like you said. Sure the laws are bit more conservative in lets say Kuwait then they are here in the US. And fwiw lets not forget the US executes prisoners and is home to the worlds biggest prison population by country. But we have to be careful in criticizing another countries legal system simply b/c of the unique difference of beliefs around the world.

In Kuwait, they are openly planning to test migrants for "homosexual" leanings before being granted access.

They have the same forced marriages, child marriages and slavery issues that all other muslim-majority countries have.

Last May, "Kuwait’s parliament approved the death sentence for those who “insult Allah, the Qu’ran, Muslim prophets, or Muhammad’s wives.”

In Kuwait, legislation has been tabled that would "limit Christian churches and non-Muslim places of worship" and approve "constitutional amendments to impose Islamic law, or Shariah.”

In Kuwait, a man was arrested for insulting the prophet Mohhamed on his twitter account.

Kuwaiti women are not permitted to transmit their citizenship their descendants unless the father is also a Kuwaiti citizen.

In Kuwait, a muslim woman must marry a muslim man, by law.

Etc.

Etc.

fwiw Kuwait has carried out two executions in the past 12 years

interestingly enough one of the criminals was found guilty of raping multiple young girls which debunks the 5 male witness theory, at least in this case which took place in Kuwait under Sharia.

The other criminal burned a Asian couples home killing two and was caught before tried to do the same to an Egyptian couple. Here is a case of the law protecting non Kuwait citizens

from wiki "The former organization named Kuwait the 78th freest country on its 2011-2012 Press Freedom Index, out of 179 rated countries. In 2011, Freedom House ranked the country as "Partly Free", criticizing the government's restrictions on criticism and the lack of an independent judiciary, while praising the nation's academic freedom and its respect for the rights of religious minorities"

Kuwaiti women are considered to be among the most emancipated women in the Middle East region. In 2011, Kuwait was ranked highest of all Middle East countries in gender equality in the Human Development Report's Gender Inequality Index.

Yes there is some work to be done but compared to other nations human rights Kuwait fairs much better and is in the process of improving their law

I could also list a bunch of false convictions of prisoners here in the US along with cases of discrimination

They executed 3 men on the same day in April.