
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.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 22:23, Reply)

( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 22:24, Reply)

and isn't necessarily right. Separation of church and state goes back to the puritans, the idea isn't universal.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 22:30, Reply)

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.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 22:38, Reply)

neither is vigilantism generally. Neither are muslims actually required to stone adulterers as a condition of being muslims.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 23:02, Reply)

but it is in the Old Testament, so it has at some point been outlawed by law despite being part of the Jewish religion.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 23:10, Reply)

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.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 23:17, Reply)

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.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 23:27, Reply)

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.
( , Fri 13 Jul 2012, 23:35, Reply)

Stoning adulterers is as much a "unambiguous requirement of the holy text" as circumcision.
( , Sat 14 Jul 2012, 0:01, Reply)

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.
( , Sat 14 Jul 2012, 0:05, Reply)