I agree...But at the same time, why do we think it's ok to chop bits off babies just because it's religion?
(
Kung_Fu_Russ ran out of amusing signatures on, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 22:17,
Reply)
Well let me put it this way...
unless some government is brave enough to come out and say "Judaism is wrong, the Bible is not the word of God &c, and no-one has the right to believe it is" they can hardly outlaw something that is an unambiguous requirement of the holy text, unless they claim to be a higher authority than God.
(
Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 22:23,
Reply)
religion and politics should always be separate. It's even in the american constitution (I think)
(
HappyToast Groat froth, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 22:24,
Reply)
what's in the American constitution doesn't apply to the whole world,
and isn't necessarily right. Separation of church and state goes back to the puritans, the idea isn't universal.
(
Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 22:30,
Reply)
Maybe so,
but we shouldn't discount it for that reason.
What's in the Bible doesn't apply to the whole world and isn't necessarily right either. Doesn't mean there aren't good ideas to live by in there.
(
wheresthefish Partly filled with wrong, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 22:38,
Reply)
No,
neither is vigilantism generally. Neither are muslims actually required to stone adulterers as a condition of being muslims.
(
Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 23:02,
Reply)
Not sure about muslims,
but it is in the Old Testament, so it has at some point been outlawed by law despite being part of the Jewish religion.
(
monkeon schmonkeon, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 23:10,
Reply)
It wasn't something ordinary people would have done spontaneously,
it was a capital punishment, it happened by order of the Jewish law court (Sanhedrin) after a guilty verdict at a trial.
The Sanhedrin hasn't sat since the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 AD. So it wasn't outlawed by law, but rather the authority that enacted it disappeared.
I'm not sure what the muslim set-up is, but it's definitely part of the legal system. No individual is required to partake in such an act in order to be considered a muslim.
(
Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 23:17,
Reply)
But our law
does not let them set up their own law court and dish out the punishments the OT clearly says they should.
Hence, there have been aspects of their culture outlawed already.
(
monkeon schmonkeon, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 23:27,
Reply)
they wouldn't set one up if we let them,
in fact they have their own country and they still don't do it there, because the temple was destroyed so there's no authority for the Sanhedrin.
Some Zionists want to build the third temple and resume temple sacrifices again.
(
Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Fri 13 Jul 2012, 23:35,
Reply)
Surely they should be allowed if they wanted to, though?
Stoning adulterers is as much a "unambiguous requirement of the holy text" as circumcision.
(
monkeon schmonkeon, Sat 14 Jul 2012, 0:01,
Reply)
It's a requirement of the Jewish law court, should there ever be one,
and should anyone ever be convicted of adultery by it. It is not a requirement of an individual. Nobody is ever declared non-Jewish for not ever having stoned someone. That would actually require someone to commit adultery before it were possible for anyone to become Jewish, which would be absurd.
(
Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Sat 14 Jul 2012, 0:05,
Reply)