Samira was a child bride married at 15 and a victim of domestic violence. She had two young children, one a new-born baby, when she was arrested and had not seen her children in ten years. She saw them for the first and last time when they came to the prison to say goodbye.
At the time of writing, her execution has not been reported by domestic media or officials in Iran.
Rights group calls for Ali Khamenei and other leaders of the Islamic Republic to be held accountable for this crime.
Removed by mod
You wouldn’t deny that woman entry would you?
What about the nice people actually attempting to find a better life and a way out of the tyranny and oppression?
So ex-muslims? Nothing against them as far as I’m concerned.
I’m sure she was Muslim till the very last cause I’d sure as hell find religion when I’m facing the end. I’d like to think I’d remain rational but it’s daunting AF. But she’s not one of the bad ones is she?
Also by that logic and if as you say you feel Islam is as whacked as Christianity you should just ban religious people. While being more exclusive I could get on board with that doctrine.
That would be ideal, agreed. I’m not singling out Islam here.
this is pretty much the solution for a lot of problems
If she still considered herself a Muslim, then what happened to her was perfectly in line with her claimed worldview. She can only ever see herself as a victim by rejecting her religion. She probably wasn’t conscious of it but at this point I’d say she was already an ex-muslim, it’s a matter of a therapist making her aware of it (assuming she’d be rescued in time!).
I would propose that perhaps linking religion with the religious leadership is linking Christianity with “the church”. And using that logic all Christians condone pedaphilia which isn’t the case. Islam the religion isn’t about cruelty anymore than Christianity is about white supremacy.
Yes, linking the religious leadership of the inherently strongly hierarchical belief systems with these belief systems sounds very reasonable to me.
I have an impression we agree on the reasoning, just not on the details and the conclusions from these details. At this point we’re arguing the semantics of whether the religious people rejecting their religious leadership still belong to the same religion or rather they invented their own religion distinct from the original one. In other words, whether the leadership is an inherent part of their religion.
Do I have that right that apart from the above we’re pretty much on the same page?
I think the trouble with the conclusion you’re drawing is that it enables one to make sweeping statements about Muslims on the whole while maintaining plausible deniability in claiming that they’re only referring to “the bad ones.” In other words, sort of an inverse “No True Scotsman” fallacy.
Furthermore, I would wager that most people you’re referring to as “ex-Muslim” would still very much consider themselves to be Muslim, and even though you’re explicitly not addressing them in your claims, it’s not a huge leap that someone acting in worse faith would use your rationale as an excuse to generalize the entire demographic (including the so-called “ex-Muslims”).
I’d argue by that merit they most Christians are ex-Christians
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
ignoring that this is severely debatable, “which religion is more fine with sexual abuse” is an embarrassing pissing contest to have and one that we’re not interested in having on this website.
deleted by creator
Nice cock measuring contest
Sounds like you’ve never been to the American South, or to Rural Latin America, or to Poland, or to Hungary, or to Russia, or…
See, the thing about religion, that no religious person wants to come to terms with, is that no religion is a monolith. What does that mean?
Even if you claim to be a fully practicing Christian, Muslim, Hindi, etc, there will always be descrepencies. Furthermore, no one believes exactly the same thing as someone else. The nature and limitations of the human mind does not permit it, so thinking that if you identify with a religion that suddenly your behaviour is dictated by dogma is nonsensical.
This also means that Christians today are not responsible for the crusades or the persecution as well as eradication of European pagans, and that Islam is not to blame for what’s going on in Iran, largely because they were irrelevant to the actual goals, which was for certain people to gain more power and wealth.
The Iranian government doesn’t give a shit about the 5 columns of Islam. Not even close. But they absolutely love having morals police, executions and an authoritarian system that seeks to subjugate and suppress any kind of democratic movement.
The Iranian regime knows the Iranian people, and if they could they would turn liberal democracy in a heartbeat, and they are still mostly Muslim. That’s why the boot has to stomp and fists have to bang on doors, like all the time.
I think people easily forget how fucked you can be if the state has so much power they can effectively curb any dissent. At that point the religion used just becomes a nice decorative mask to put on, both to keep power, but also to keep using fear via “us vs them”. This is also signified by the secular Muslim empires.
Just a little bit of history is enough to dispell all fears about religion and to squarely focus on corruption and authoritarianism instead, which is where our focus should be - and that’s coming from an atheist.
Yes, I am firmly convinced that religion (and ideology) is used as a pretext for suppresssing people. One of Iran’s major partner countries is China, for example, but Iran says nothing about Beijing’s oppression of the Muslim Uyghur minority in China. They don’t care.
It’s all about power, and we see similar things all around the globe across all cultures and ages, including here in Europe.
absolutely fuck off with this bigotry
Yes cause all Muslims are the same as the Iranian regime /s.
Fuck of with the blatant racism/xenophobia.
Fuck islam and muslims
I don’t understand… she has the right in islamic law to ask for divorce which she would have been granted by a judge seeing the abuse.
I think it is not possible in Christian law for a woman to ask for divorce except in the case of adultry, but Islamic law is clear about cases where the husband is abusive or doesn’t take his responsibilities. I just don’t get how people still consider Iran as a country that upholds Islamic law, unless they don’t know said law.