b3ta.com talk
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Talk » Message 4127742 (Thread)

How so?
If someone is too ignorant to bother learning a little
local culture before emigrating to work in another
country for a while, and falls afoul of an obscure draconian law,
it's their own fault and I have no sympathy with their predicament,
no matter how severe/unfair the punishment is.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:05, archived)
Please
sort out your
line breaks.
I keep thinking
you're writing
verse.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:06, archived)
Pf
f
t
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:07, archived)
I want this on a David Shrigley-style postcard

(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:07, archived)
I'd say I'm a poet but didn't know it,
I'd make a rhyme, everytime,
But really, I'm just shit.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:10, archived)
things are getting a little tense.

(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:11, archived)
I cannot even entertain this notion.
A woman could die because of this , she has gone to the country to help children learn , a country that has a poor educational record to start with.

I can understand if she had commited a crime that has hurt or deprived someone that punishment would be expected , but all she did was allow her class to pick a name , a name that about a third of the men in the country have.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:09, archived)
I have a lot of sympathy for her
but the law's the law.
if you steal stuff in Saudi, expect to lose an extremity or two.
if you are brazillian and an electrician in Britain, expect to be shot repeatedly in the head.
if you smuggle drugs in the wrong place, expect 20 years in jail.
upset the religious authorities in a strongly Muslim country where they have corporal punishment, expect a few days in chokey as a good alternative.
I can understand it's an innocent mistake, and as such people get upset about that on her behalf.
I cannot understand the people calling her to be let off "as it's a Christian school"... it's still inside Sudan, and hence runs under their laws, unless being a Christian school nullifies the law of the land?
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:18, archived)
This is striking several bells on the cunt-o-metre

(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:21, archived)
I've actually been deafened the alarms.

(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:26, archived)
cheers.
why am I being a cunt?

she's in a country, voluntarily, and has violated one of their laws. that law was not put into place after she went, it was in place a long time before.
if I were making the decision about what to do about her, it'd involve taking her to one side and telling her not to upset the religious nutters again, pretty please. in those words.
should she prove to be a staunch christian, she would most likely take some offence at that, though that offence would have no legal basis in that country.
I'm not making the decision. someone who is probably muslim is making that decision (vast sweeping generalisations aside, if the law's religious, the person adjudicating will most likely be of that religion).
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 17:01, archived)
LAST WORD LAST WORD LAST WORD
I was objecting mostly to the "If you are brazillian and an electrician in Britain..." part.

Which is ludicrous and makes me shake with anger in my belly.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 18:03, archived)
I'll agree it's ludicrous
but I'm also pointing out that sometimes very very stupid things are done and still considered "legal" (how many of the cops who shot menezes have been tried for manslaughter or murder?). this, despite the fact that an (apparently - I have no in-depth knowledge on any crimes other than his lack of being a terrierist) innocent man lost his life through blatant idiocy through an action intended to uphold the law.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 18:33, archived)
so...
do something wrong, in the wrong place, where there are laws against doing that thing, and it's okay if you're british?

laws are applicable to the land they are in. some countries have reciprocal arrangements to extend another country's laws beyond their borders.
some countries apply some of their laws to all of their citizens even while in another country (eg the UK paedophilia laws).

if someone comes to britain from germany and drives 150mph down the motorway, which is legal in germany, would they not expect to be punished for breaking the law in the uk?
would the motoring lobbies in germany be outraged if he was fined, possibly banned from driving in the uk for a period, possibly imprisoned if he was driving in a manner deemed to be reckless by the police, as he was driving a german-made car in a manner legal in his own country, despite being in britain?

the law's the law in the country to which it applies.
right or wrong, it's what's used to protect, punish and penalise the population.
if you don't like living under that law, go somewhere else.

I agree that laws and religion *shouldn't* have anything to do with each other, but this is reality. a few hundred years ago in this country it was effectively illegal to celebrate a catholic mass, occasionally punishable by corporal or capital punishment.
we've moved on from that and now have a bigger gap between most of our laws and religion.
not all countries have done the same, or see a need to.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:37, archived)
i think it's the actual law that people are disagreeing with,
rather than the right to have your own laws in your own countries.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:43, archived)
or, more accurately, the punishment.

(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:44, archived)
I agree it's a daft law.
most things rooted in religion are, to a greater or lesser degree.
I also agree that flogging is a very nasty way to treat people, and I'd rather not visit a country where that was an option which could be used on me should I do something wrong, by accident or otherwise.
at points in the past we (the UK, or component parts as applicable) have had religious-based laws that carried physical punishment, both corporal and capital.
some (see the witch-trials of a few centuries back) were horrific, both in the ways the law was applied, and the people who were punished under it.
this is the situation in Sudan.
it was the situation before she went there and will most likely be the situation when she returns home.
people saying "oh no, that's awful" won't change a damned thing in that country.
people not going there, not spending money on things sourced there, campaigning on human rights there, etc *might* have a bigger effect.

edit: plus to the german motorist, the 70mph law on the motorway may appear to be complete bollocks as that limit is based on the abilities of a very very old and crap motorcar. logically, then, he'd feel entirely justified going 150mph to get where he was going a bit faster. many in this country would actually agree with him on that point, but he'd still be punished for doing that speed.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:51, archived)
so nobody should mention that it is awful?
what?
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:56, archived)
if you think it's wrong
DO something.
email your MP.
picket the Sudanese embassy.

but don't just say "oh that's awful, they shouldn't uphold their own legal system in their own country like that"
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 17:03, archived)
so your point is that people shouldn't do one thing when they could be doing something else?
and you don't even know that they are not doing something else? what? christ.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 17:17, archived)
okay.
quick guess time:
how many people who participated in this thread have done anything other than participate in this thread about it?

one? two?

how many people thought it was a Bad Thing for someone to risk physical punishment for naming a teddy bear?

lots.

go on, please prove me wrong, people. if you've been moved to actually act by this whole mess, please let me know.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 17:23, archived)
you're an idiot.

(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 17:25, archived)
many would agree
with you on that fact.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 18:38, archived)
you should be in politics.
they love people who use loads of words to make no decent point.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:58, archived)
Huzzah!
*enters politics*
...messes about a bit...
*leaves politics in disgust*

edit: sorry about all the words. I tend to type too quickly and never bother editing down for length.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 17:14, archived)
^All this and a bag of chips!
- sympathy
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:25, archived)
No sympathy?
You're a fucking tosser, then.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:09, archived)
Cold, cruel and callous, maybe.
But I'm no tosser.

Fucking, or otherwise.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:13, archived)
I have sympathy for her plight.
she was doing something she hoped would better the lot of children in that country (the teaching, not the whole teddy thing, obviously).
she was a bit naive with the whole teddy thing.
she may be punished for that, in accordance with the laws in Sudan.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:42, archived)
Two mini tiny almost unimportant points.
What makes you think she was at all ignorant of the local culture?
How the fuck does anything she did or anything she may be unaware of make her deserve a flogging? Anything. Just one little thing that might possibly deserve that. Perhaps she pinched a lollipop in 1968?
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:10, archived)
Oh dear lord, please tell me you're not bieng serious.

(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:12, archived)
Being careless or insulting a religion
does not deserve a flogging.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:13, archived)
"flogging" is a polite euphanism
this woman could be beaten in a fashoin that opens wounds 40 times.Every new wound crossing the last , and it wont stop until its done , even if the "prisoner" is unconcious.

Healthy men die from this treatment.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:16, archived)
I know that.
And never said it did.

But that is their laws and there is not one thing anyone here can do at this minute to change them.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:17, archived)
Oh well then.
We'd better all turn off our sympathy glands.

Are you being a genuine prick? Or is this just internet prickery?
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:20, archived)
No.
I've just seen so much stupid shit in the news,
that I'll choose what to feel sympathy for rather than being told.
(, Wed 28 Nov 2007, 16:30, archived)