freediver wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 6:13pm:

That depends on whether the Muslims want to live in a theocracy or not I'd assume.

Muslims don't all act as one organism which is controlled from one mind. Some would vote for it others wouldn't..

In my opinion a Muslim should vote for it and would be obligated to, but there is a difference of opinion on the matter.

freediver wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 6:13pm:

Not correct, the one who isn't married gets lashed. The one who is gets death penalty by stoning.

freediver wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 6:13pm:

Yes sounds correct. Providing that witnesses have been provided.

freediver wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 6:13pm:


* Homosexuality: The penalty is the same as for adultery or fornication, depending on whether you are married. This would only take place once Australia became a theocracy. Very few gays would actually be executed because apparently homosexuality simply disappears under Islam. That is, it is not driven underground by the death penalty, rather men just stop having sex with each other because they are Muslims. Four witnesses are necessary to secure a conviction and punishment. They can witness the act in a serial manner.
[/quote]
Yes, all witnessing the same act. I personally don't believe the notion that people who are Muslim would never partake in a homosexual act.

freediver wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 6:13pm:

I think this really depends on mental state as well as their body FD, for example if we tried to apply the above in Australia it wouldn't work because in Australia people don't really gain maturity until they are older. In other places and in olden times people grew up quicker because more responsibility was put on them. But here it's not the same. 
freediver wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 6:13pm:

Yes
freediver wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 6:13pm:

I don't really know what penalty there is, perhaps a fine or something would be applied.
freediver wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 6:13pm:

No
freediver wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 6:13pm:

I'm not sure sorry.. I'll check up for you.
freediver wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 6:13pm:

Depends what they steal, again it's subject to the rules of judgement as any western judge would have. If they are stealing to provide food for their family it means that they really were compelled to do it. Thus the state failed to ensure it's citizens had the ability to look after themselves.

If the person is stealing just because thats how they want to live their life and it's serious enough they may have their hand cut off.

freediver wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 6:13pm:

I'll have a think about it.

freediver wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 7:22pm:

From my understanding it's based upon the danger to society FD. If the person is having gay orgies at their house and there is enough reasonable suspicion to be sure of it, I'm sure they'd do a raid when they think it's occuring and catch them in the act.

If it's one person just doing it with another I highly doubt any police would try catch them do it because they wouldn't find out about it.

freediver wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 7:22pm:

You do also know that Islamic law only applies to Muslims right? Christians and Jews would be judged under their own religious laws and not ours.

I think there would also be some kind of civil law aswell which would be for things which aren't covered by religious law.

Read a bit of the 100 lashes for a variety of sexual "crimes" in an islamic country (that does not exist).

What about for a masochist ?

mozzaok wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 7:49pm:

That isn't true at all.

Mary had Jesus when she was about 13 years old, meaning she obviously started mensturating at the age of about 12.

In addition to that it depends where you live. In harsh places like the desert people tend to menstruate earlier.

Malik Shakur wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 7:26pm:


Neither do I. In fact I knew several practicing Muslims in Indonesia who were gay.

You do also know that Islamic law only applies to Muslims right? Christians and Jews would be judged under their own religious laws and not ours.

And what about atheists? What about Christians and Jews who want to live under secular law? Wouldn't people 'forum shop' and change their religion depending on the crime?

People mature earlier now, with some females getting their period before they are even 10.

In earlier days, menstruation rarely came before a girl was 15, in the time of mohammed, 15 to 18 was the range of ages when menstruation was likely to start.

Can you back that up Mozz? I thought there was only a very recent trend towards earlier maturation due to the use of hormones in agriculture, but the bulk of the trend was for later maturation, due to better nutrition, health etc.

freediver wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 9:06pm:

That's a good question regarding athiests, it's something I'm still studying into. There would of course be civic law too which needed to be stuck to by the citizenry, Islamic law would apply to Muslims, Jewish law to Jews and Christian law to Christians..

Although I think you would find that the Christian and Jewish punishment for apostasy is death.

What stops people from continuously changing religions to suit their own needs is their fear of God. A true Christian, Jew or Muslim would not change religion for such purposes because they'd fear the wrath of God too much. The punishment in this life is nothing compared to that of the next life.

freediver wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 9:06pm:

Yeah that's right FD, it has gotten later.

mozzaok wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 9:14pm:

No, it doesn't actually.

Islamic law dictates that if a person leaves Islam then it is their choice, if however they leave Islam and go to war against the hate or incite violence against the state then that is the death penalty too. That is the punishment for treason, not for apostacy.


mozzaok wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 9:14pm:

Catholic Encyclopedia quotes it being in the apocryphal writings actually.


mozzaok wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 9:14pm:


It's not baseless at all.