Patterico's Pontifications

3/30/2011

Bangladeshi Girl, 14, Raped by Cousin and then Beaten to Death For Adultery Under Sharia Law

Filed under: General — Aaron Worthing @ 12:42 pm

[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; if you have tips, please send them here.  Or by Twitter @AaronWorthing.]

In some barbaric interpretations of Islam, a woman cannot prove she is raped without four witnesses to back her up (which, in cases of rape, are typically hard to come by), so it is common for such a woman to assert she was raped and then be punished for adultery when she can’t sufficiently prove the rape.  But this case is more outrageous than most:

Hena Akhter’s last words to her mother proclaimed her innocence. But it was too late to save the 14-year-old girl.

Her fellow villagers in Bangladesh’s Shariatpur district had already passed harsh judgment on her. Guilty, they said, of having an affair with a married man. The imam from the local mosque ordered the fatwa, or religious ruling, and the punishment: 101 lashes delivered swiftly, deliberately in public.

Hena dropped after 70.

Bloodied and bruised, she was taken to hospital, where she died a week later.

Amazingly, an initial autopsy report cited no injuries and deemed her death a suicide. Hena’s family insisted her body be exhumed. They wanted the world to know what really happened to their daughter.

Read the whole thing, although it will raise your blood pressure as you do.  For instance, the attacker was her cousin, more than three times her age.  She alleged forcible rape.  And even if she was making that part up, we are talking about a girl so young that her consent was meaningless.  In other words, contrary to what Roman Polanski and his defenders say, even if she said yes, it was still rape.  As Patrick wrote in a different context: “she was just a little girl.”  And heartbreakingly, her parents were forced to watch as their daughter was murdered.

If there is any silver lining, here, it is that this was unlawful under Bangladeshi law and it seems that authorities might be reacting appropriately:

Hena might have quietly become another one of those statistics had it not been for the outcry and media attention that followed her death on January 31….

Monday, the doctors responsible for Hena’s first autopsy faced prosecution for what a court called a “false post-mortem report to hide the real cause of Hena’s death.”

Public outrage sparked by that autopsy report prompted the high court to order the exhumation of Hena’s body in February. A second autopsy performed at Dhaka Medical College Hospital revealed Hena had died of internal bleeding and her body bore the marks of severe injuries.

Police are now conducting an investigation and have arrested several people, including Mahbub Khan, in connection with Hena’s death.

“I’ve nothing to demand but justice,” said Darbesh Khan [the victim’s father], leading a reporter to the place where his daughter was abducted the night she was raped.

He stood in silence and took a deep breath. She wasn’t even old enough to be married, he said, testament to Hena’s tenderness in a part of the world where many girls are married before adulthood. “She was so small.”

Hena’s mother, Aklima, stared vacantly as she spoke of her daughter’s last hours. She could barely get out her words. “She was innocent,” Aklima said, recalling Hena’s last words.

Police were guarding Hena’s family earlier this month. Darbesh and Aklima feared reprisal for having spoken out against the imam and the village elders.

They had meted out the most severe punishment for their youngest daughter. They could put nothing past them.

Decades ago Martin Luther King stood by the graves of three little girls murdered by the forces of evil and told us that “God still has a way of wringing good out of evil. And history has proven over and over again that unmerited suffering is redemptive.”  And like him, we can hope that the blood of this innocent girl will prove a redemptive force in that nation.

And we might remember this the next time someone pretends that Sharia is just another legal system, no better or worse than any other.

Finally, I have to really give it to Cnn and particularly Farid Ahmed and Moni Basu for this no-holds-barred story on the subject.

Hat tip: Instapundit.

[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]

62 Responses to “Bangladeshi Girl, 14, Raped by Cousin and then Beaten to Death For Adultery Under Sharia Law”

  1. Peaceful religion.

    Torquemada (2a42d3)

  2. Are femisogynists in this country once again too busy defending reproductive rights and equality for womyn to condemn this kind of brutality?

    daleyrocks (9b57b3)

  3. Amazingly, an initial autopsy report cited no injuries and deemed her death a suicide.

    HEAD EXPLODES

    Dustin (c16eca)

  4. oh noes! dustin is dead!

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  5. Just when you might, in a moment of weakness, think that Islam has some redeeming features, reality hits you in the face, and through the tears, you know that some cancers cannot be lived with.

    To all those members of CAIR I say:
    This could be you!

    AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92)

  6. Islam is absolutely vile and should never be allowed to establish itself in this country. If necessary amend the Bill of Rights freedom of religion to say “except for Islam”.

    Perhaps I speak only for myself but I don’t like them and I don’t want them here.

    Douglas (392f36)

  7. I hope these swine make it to “paradise” and find they are servicing 72 virgin bulls for all of eternity.

    Islam is detestable and those who practice it demonstrate that fact every single day!

    WarEagle (08c61f)

  8. If necessary amend the Bill of Rights freedom of religion to say “except for Islam”.

    the bill of rights doesn’t grant us freedom to practice religion. It recognizes that a legitimate government must recognize this basic human right, that has always existed.

    We should instead make sure honor killings are outlawed and loudly condemned, and also make sure our educators are producing high school graduates who understand that so many horrors against women occur outside the western world. They should be taught western civilization. I don’t think someone who understands it is likely to revert to this barbaric religious practice.

    Certainly, I don’t think Muslims murder rape victims in the USA very often.

    Robert, the animals who did this want you to think they are the only Islam, but they hate westernized Muslims more than anything else.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  9. Douglas, rather than Robert.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  10. The religion of peace strikes again!

    Tim (120c89)

  11. Please send this to Bill O’Reilly at FOX NEWS. He denied Wafa Sultan’s report of exactly this “4 males required” provision of Sharia Law when she was on his show.

    ropelight (2e84d2)

  12. I like General Napier’s statement about 1849 –

    You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours.

    That’s the way I would handle these sharia laws but that is impractical given the pussy footing that goes on with Muslims.

    Mike K (8f3f19)

  13. I try to hold out hope that there is an Islam that is moderate, but when I read about horrors like this, I can’t help but think it is nothing but a perversion and a plague…

    Ellen (a13e9f)

  14. ***
    Every woman and girl in these benighted muslim countries need to arm themselves and need to learn how to shoot to kill-or to do 9mm. “vasctomies” when the perps show up.
    ***
    And–if the criminal “justice” system won’t protect the innocent victims–then some 12 gauge vigilante work on the sharia “judges” should be done by the families.
    ***
    They need to make sure that “what goes around comes around”–in #00 buckshot.
    ***
    Rocketman
    ***

    John Bibb (193f6e)

  15. Did you ask Whoopi Goldberg whether she thought this attack was really, ya know,rape rape?

    Mike Myers (0e06a9)

  16. A tragic event in the name of the religion of hate. My apologies for using this forum to point out the hypocrisy of the left who urge tolerance of other cultures, even a culture that enslaves half its population and proudly demonstrates their enslavement of people. Further, the hypocrisy of the left that openly welcomes a society that seeks to destroy the very values the left claims to cherish.

    Joe (6120a4)

  17. ________________________________________

    Sharia is just another legal system, no better or worse than any other.

    As a conservative, such cultural quirks associated with ultra-rightist, Islamo-cuckoo societies sicken me. I have no problem being repulsed by what I see in nations like Bangladesh.

    I wonder how many liberals — certainly throughout the Western World — feel the same way? Okay, they may at least claim they’re outraged. But then their screwed-up sentiments of “honor the underdog, pity the Third World, cry over the anti-imperialist peoples of the Middle East/Asia,” and they find themselves rationalizing, rationalizing, excusing, excusing, justifying, justifying the situation.

    And such people of the left believe their reactions and opinions should be trusted? That their reactions and opinions are resting on a foundation of true compassion and humaneness?

    Sickening.

    Mark (411533)

  18. Are femisogynists in this country once again too busy defending reproductive rights and equality for womyn to condemn this kind of brutality?

    daley, they already have reproductive rights, the glass ceilings are pretty much shattered (clearly a woman can become president, if that’s the final litmus test…it’s just a matter of the *right* woman filling the bill), so there’s no longer much to screech about here in the West, which ultimately makes their silence all the more shameful.

    Of course, to stand in support of Muslim women and publicly condemn the brutality would put feminists in the risky position of being labeled a racist, or worse, Islamaphobic.

    So, are they willing to lay their beliefs on the line for their oppressed sisters while simultaneously offending their progressive brethren?

    Hell no.

    Dana (9f3823)

  19. Diane Sawyer, Katie Couric, Christiane Amanpour, where are you?

    elissa (b329f9)

  20. I don’t know where they are, elissa, but I suspect somewhere feeling smug in their own righteousness.

    But at least this fiercely gorgeous woman is willing to put her life on the line to make a stand against the insanity.

    Dana (9f3823)

  21. Re: #8 Dustin “the bill of rights doesn’t grant us freedom to practice religion.”

    Amendment 1: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;(My bold)

    No, Congress did not give us freedom to practice religion. As with all natural or unalienable rights, that right came from our Creator. Congress is forbidden from interfering in our practice of religion. That freedom was the reason why a large percentage of early immigrants came to this country.

    So someone please explain why Christians can’t pray in school but Muslims can ?

    Please discuss!

    Ken (da3b9a)

  22. Diane Sawyer, Katie Couric, Christiane Amanpour, where are you?

    They, like Jordan Eason, are protecting their access.

    AD-RtR/OS! (e05ee5)

  23. Dana

    yeah, she was going to appear in a follow up post. probably tomorrow.

    Aaron Worthing (73a7ea)

  24. In some barbaric interpretations of Islam, a woman cannot prove she is raped without four witnesses to back her up (which, in cases of rape, are typically hard to come by),

    Why do you think that religion requires 4 witness – Who would have written that rule – Was some one trying to protect themselves?

    joe (93323e)

  25. joe

    i will note that in the south, in the days of slavery, there was a rule that no black person could be a witness against a white person. so there were laws on the books that said a master couldn’t cross a certain threshold of cruelty, but it was easily defeated by this rule. the accusation was this wasn’t a bug, but a feature.

    So, yeah, maybe so.

    Aaron Worthing (73a7ea)

  26. If islam is ultra right then how come the communists of today align with islam then?

    DohBiden (984d23)

  27. #24, when a Pedophile and Drug Abuser is the founder of a religion, he usually installs rules which protect him from contempt.

    Torquemada (2a42d3)

  28. Crap like this is why islam is a monumental FAILURE! The human garbage that commit this EVIL and then justify it will never hold themselves accountable and they rig the system so no one else can either. Since they cannot ever admit anything is their own fault, the islamic world will continue in their failure and be held in contempt by decent people.

    snark (b886d3)

  29. In other words, if this culture is too STUPID to tell the difference between the perp and the victim, there’s no hope for them.

    snark (b886d3)

  30. (sigh) Aaron, you have a LOT more research to do if you think any of this is exceptional in Islam.

    All Sunni, Sufi, and Shiite branches of Sharia law agree that a woman needs four witnesses in at least some cases. The majority of these require four male witnesses. Some require only two male witnesses or four female witnesses.

    In the traditional Islamic world, again all three major branches, a man can consummate a marriage to a girl as young as 9. Some allow marriage but not consummation at 6 according to sharia law and the model of the perfect Muslim, Mohammed. (Mohammed wrote the marriage contract for Ayesha when she was 6 and consummated it when she was 9. Therefore that MUST be legal.)

    One divide is in the punishment for the girl. It can be anything from high dozens of lashes to death by stoning.

    Furthermore, the Qur’an declares a woman is as tilth for the man to do with as he wishes. (Tilth being his fields.) He is required to beat her if she disappoints him. Some translations Bowdlerize this to chastise lightly. The original Arabic, I have seen demonstrated, is outright beat her if that is felt to be needed.

    That is why Sharia law is not something we can tolerate in this country even in the tiniest of measures.

    {^_^}         (The J stands for Joanne. That is why I am so passionate about this.)

    [note: this is not the same JD who regularly comes here.]

    JD (bcdcf2)

  31. There’s something very wrong with this story and others like it that spread over the news every so often. It makes no sense, and whatever you say about sharia it’s above all a logical system. If four witnesses are required, then how can she be convicted of adultery without them? The only evidence for the sex is her word, and her word is that she was raped; it’s either admissible or it isn’t. And in fact the Koran requires four witnesses for adultery, not for rape, so the story seems to get it backwards. What exactly is going on with these cases I don’t know, but I can’t accept that it’s anything to do with Islam or sharia.

    One point, though:

    She alleged forcible rape. And even if she was making that part up, we are talking about a girl so young that her consent was meaningless. In other words, contrary to what Roman Polanski and his defenders say, even if she said yes, it was still rape. As Patrick wrote in a different context: “she was just a little girl.”

    Sorry, that is absolute nonsense. She was 14. Our great-great-grandmothers were getting married at 14, and nobody considered it rape. Our culture may have infantilised adolescents to the point where they can’t consent to sex, but she wasn’t living in our culture, was she? What makes her different from every 14-year-old in history who freely consented to sex with her husband?

    Indeed, right here in NY, in the 21st century, a 14-year-old girl can get married with the consent of her parents and a judge. In CA, if WP is to be believed, there is no minimum age if the parents consent. In Scotland, again according to WP, at 14 only parental consent is needed. In such cases, the law does not call the husband a rapist, so on what basis do you call him one?

    Not to mention the fictional Juliet, or the very much non-fictional Glückel of Hameln, whom I just happened to think of as a random example. Or Marilyn Monroe. Was Mahatma Gandhi a rapist? No. This girl said she was raped, so I see no reason to disbelieve her; but had she consented it would not have been considered rape by her or anybody around her, so there’s no reason we should have considered it rape either.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  32. Sorry, that is absolute nonsense. She was 14. Our great-great-grandmothers were getting married at 14, and nobody considered it rape

    other than the fact she was whiped to death, oter than that…

    EricPWJonson (e8f48c)

  33. Eric, what has that got to do with the paragraph I quoted?

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  34. Milhouse,

    Reread what you wrote, seemed out of place insensitive.

    also you are right, thats not Sharia law, and sharia law isnt from the Koran, its from the interpretations of the Korans by the flavr of the month inman, and it widely differs country to country

    EricPWJonson (e8f48c)

  35. “In other words, contrary to what Roman Polanski and his defenders say, even if she said yes, it was still rape.”

    I find it beyond reason that you’re comparing the Roman Polanski case to what happened to this poor Bangladeshi girl. Not only are they apples to oranges, they are night and day. Samantha Geimer, the woman who he had illegal sex with, is still alive and breathing, not whipped to death in her grave. What Polanski is guilty of is “unlawful sex with a minor”, not “rape” or “murder”. What he did is not even considered “rape” according to California law. Your illogic is rather stunning.

    silkroad (2d81b6)

  36. I heart Polanski child assrape apologists.

    JD (0b7af0)

  37. JD

    > The J stands for Joanne. That is why I am so passionate about this.

    And all this time I pegged you as a dude. heh.

    probably because most women don’t go by initials.

    silk

    > Samantha Geimer, the woman who he had illegal sex with, is still alive and breathing,

    well, i suppose you could hold her rapist responsible for her death, rationally. i hadn’t really thought of it that way. But given what he knew of their society, i suppose you could call him a murderer, too.

    > Polanski is guilty of is “unlawful sex with a minor”, not “rape”

    Most states call it rape, but i don’t know about cali. But i am not talking about the law, but morality. And i was speaking hypothetically if the girl had actually said yes, which in that hypothetical would be much closer to the polanski case. of course polanski also allegedly plied her with drugs and alcohol before anally raping her, and i believe those allegations, but he only pled guilty to the statutory rape.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  38. That was not me.

    JD (0b7af0)

  39. JD is a man. You can tell whenever Maybee is in a thread, lol.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  40. Milhouse

    > And in fact the Koran requires four witnesses for adultery, not for rape, so the story seems to get it backwards.

    Jesus H. Christ, the only thing unusual about this story is that she was 14. Well, I HOPE that part is unusual. But women who allege rape are beaten or murdered all the time in Islamic countries.

    The way they see it, clearly, is that if a woman says she was raped, she was definitely admitting to sex. When a person admits to something you don’t need witnesses to prove it. Consider this passage from a PRO-Islam website:

    > In the case of adultery, Islam requires four witnesses to testify that they have seen the offence, or else, a clear and confirmed confession by the perpetrators.

    http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=articles&id=135153

    And as for the proof of rape thing, see here:

    http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=89553

    and this:

    http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&Id=132410&ShowVoteResult=yes

    Oh, and this is pretty lovely:

    > It should be mentioned as well that in common circumstances other than war and the like, rape does not take place unless the woman is dressed in an attractive way that incites rape, for instance when she goes out having applied perfume and not being dressed in Hijaab, or when she is alone with a man, or mixed with marriageable men, or travelling without a Mahram, and the like. If rape takes place in such circumstances, then the woman has partially wronged herself as she paved the way for her to be raped.

    http://www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=showfatwa&Option=FatwaId&lang=E&Id=89578

    Again, this site is SUPPORTING this Neanderthal view.

    > Our great-great-grandmothers were getting married at 14, and nobody considered it rape

    Thank you for the NAMBLA view of things.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  41. Um, to this “JD” imposter, i will leave up your comment with a note that this is not the regular JD because I am frankly not sure you were trying to smear the “real” JD. Most of your comment is serious, and making a valid argument (not sure you are right, but you’re not being facially ridiculous). But please in the future, do pick a new nickname. Consider this your only warning.

    And of course, to the real JD, Patrick might not be as tolerant as I am being, but that’s my gut call for now.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  42. They did not mean any harm.

    I heart MayBee 😉

    JD (0b7af0)

  43. The way they see it, clearly, is that if a woman says she was raped, she was definitely admitting to sex. When a person admits to something you don’t need witnesses to prove it. Consider this passage from a PRO-Islam website:

    Exactly. I can’t vouch for this story, of course, but the twisted logic of it does work. By reporting a rape, the child was admitting she had intercourse with a married man.

    Personally, I refuse to accept the notion that a child can consent to sex with a much older man. The power difference is absolutely incompatible with consent, to say nothing of a child’s ability to understand the decision.

    I refuse to accept that 14 year olds can consent to sex just because 14 year old girls have been exploited in lesser cultures and times.

    Dustin (c16eca)

  44. Thanks, AW, but I am like 99.999999999999999% sure that was just someone that shares the same name. Pretty sure she posts here on sporadic basis.

    JD (0b7af0)

  45. Dustin

    > The power difference is absolutely incompatible with consent, to say nothing of a child’s ability to understand the decision.

    From what i hear, in New York State it is also rape for a K-12 teacher to have sex with a student, even if the student is otherwise old enough to consent.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  46. Ban em.

    If that makes me an anti-immigrant Jan Brewer groupie than so be it.

    DohBiden (984d23)

  47. There’s not much hope that liberals in this country will decry this. Senator Durbin is conducting hearings on Muslim civil rights in this country and managed to pick as a speaker someone who supported a radical Iman. We’re doomed.

    Rochf (f3fbb0)

  48. Milhouse – Was parental consent granted in this case? What is your point?

    daleyrocks (9b57b3)

  49. So let me guess this straight these people can have nuclear power but if we do the world will end.

    DohBiden (984d23)

  50. And–if the criminal “justice” system won’t protect the innocent victims–then some 12 gauge vigilante work on the sharia “judges” should be done by the families.

    Not only that, we need to teach them the basics of insurgent warfare- poisoning water supplies, destroying food storehouses, bridges, pipelines, hospitals, etc.

    Imagine if this was done by the victims of Jim Crow back in the 19th century.

    daley, they already have reproductive rights, the glass ceilings are pretty much shattered (clearly a woman can become president, if that’s the final litmus test…it’s just a matter of the *right* woman filling the bill), so there’s no longer much to screech about here in the West, which ultimately makes their silence all the more shameful.

    Of course, to stand in support of Muslim women and publicly condemn the brutality would put feminists in the risky position of being labeled a racist, or worse, Islamaphobic.

    So, are they willing to lay their beliefs on the line for their oppressed sisters while simultaneously offending their progressive brethren?

    Hell no.

    It is not just feminists, but homosexualist fundamentalists as well.

    What is important in the grand scheme is that we submit to God.

    Here is one question.

    How do we know that God was not the author of Sharia law?

    Michael Ejercito (64388b)

  51. I am hoping that this really wasnt meant by Milhouse that he was trying to make some other point.

    Just doesnt on the face of it sound like him.

    Maybe e can explain it further it was in the middle of the night

    EricPWJohnson (e8f48c)

  52. mike

    > Imagine if this was done by the victims of Jim Crow back in the 19th century.

    Condi Rice fondly remembers her dad chasing off the KKK with guns. different century but you get the point.

    and in macdonald, they note that very often the history of gun regulation in the US was explicitly aimed at keeping them away from black people.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  53. It is not just feminists, but homosexualist fundamentalists as well.

    What is important in the grand scheme is that we submit to God.

    Here is one question.

    How do we know that God was not the author of Sharia law?

    Comment by Michael Ejercito — 3/31/2011 @ 7:29 am

    Would a fair and just God make a law to protect pedophilia?

    Joe (6120a4)

  54. I can’t vouch for this story, of course, but the twisted logic of it does work. By reporting a rape, the child was admitting she had intercourse with a married man.

    Only if you believe her. And if you do believe her then she was raped. You can’t have it both ways; either she’s lying or she’s telling the truth. Especially when Mohammed explicitly required four witnesses for accusations of adultery, but made no such requirement for accusations of rape. In any event, since when are relations between a married man and a single woman adultery? In Islam men can have more than one wife, so the concept of a “married man” doesn’t really exist. She’s not married, so the most it can be is fornication. There is something twisted about these stories; it makes no sense to attribute them to sharia.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  55. Thank you for the NAMBLA view of things.

    Is it not true? Do you have any actual refutation of it? Or are you content calling your great-great-grandfather a rapist? And thinking that you and your peculiar micro-culture are smarter than everybody else that has ever existed on the face of the planet, including all of your own ancestors until perhaps 100 years ago? Did God appear to you and tell you this?

    I refuse to accept that 14 year olds can consent to sex just because 14 year old girls have been exploited in lesser cultures and times.

    Lesser? What exactly makes them less than you? What gives you such great moral stature that you can be sure you’re right and they’re wrong? Especially when even in your own country the law in many states disagrees with you? Tell me again, was Gandhi a rapist? Was the fictional Romeo a rapist?

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  56. I find it beyond reason that you’re comparing the Roman Polanski case to what happened to this poor Bangladeshi girl. Not only are they apples to oranges, they are night and day.

    Really?

    Samantha Geimer, the woman who he had illegal sex with, is still alive and breathing, not whipped to death in her grave.

    What has that got to do with the rape itself? It wasn’t this girl’s rapist who killed her.

    What Polanski is guilty of is “unlawful sex with a minor”, not “rape” or “murder”.

    Rubbish. What he pleaded guilty to was “unlawful sex with a minor. What he did was rape.

    What he did is not even considered “rape” according to California law.

    It certainly is. Unless CA has suddenly adopted some very peculiar laws indeed. If what Polanski did wasn’t rape under CA law, then what exactly is? What does one have to do to be convicted of rape, beyond what he did?

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  57. Aaron – There have been over the months several comments signed by a JD with this artwork as a tag line

    {^_^}

    I don’t think that it is an attempt to sockpuppet our JD as the fist time she made a comment that was at all controversial she made it clear she was not he.
    (It was somewhat confusing as her comments were not similar in tone to our JD’s comments.)

    Have Blue (854a6e)

  58. Have

    well, i don’t patrol these comments too closely, and this other JD apparently thinks similarly enough to him, that it might not have been obvious it wasn’t him.

    i don’t think this person is being a jerk, just using the same nick. and i will ask her to stop and pick a new one. maybe “the other JD?”

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  59. Would a fair and just God make a law to protect pedophilia?

    God, being Lord of Lords and King of Kings, decrees what is fair and just. Morality is His might making right.

    Michael Ejercito (64388b)

  60. Funny. The apologists for Islam — i.e. all of the usual suspects — have stayed away in droves.

    SHOCKA!

    Icy Texan (e5807c)

  61. “In any event, since when are relations between a married man and a single woman adultery?”

    Milhouse – Was that a serious question? If so, please look up the definition of adultery.

    daleyrocks (9b57b3)

  62. islam does not say whatever they r doing by the name of sariah act. its totally a brucial way.

    nihad kayem (127853)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.8599 secs.