2006-08-10 10:17:46 · 15 answers · asked by Ali 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
....and I bet they have a lot less raping going on there! As a rape survivor, I say YES - we would be much better off if a few were made examples of. The pain and suffering endured by rape victims/survivors is horrible enough that I think the penalty would be accurate. It can destroy your whole outlook on life, the opposite sex, your self esteem - it's just horrible!
2006-08-10 10:24:14 · answer #1 · answered by Giovanni 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Perhaps the victim could have a choice of that or having the rapist made non-viable.
It may be the time to start looking at this "cruel and unusual" punishment thing a bit closer. Most victims have no choice in their part of "cruel and unusual" crimes.
2006-08-10 10:27:43 · answer #2 · answered by Horndog 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It depends on the country and facet of Islam. The case I am familar with which involved three rapists who attacked a woman. The three men were sentenced to death by firing squad with the members of the firing squad being family members of the woman attacked.
2006-08-10 10:22:28 · answer #3 · answered by Mohammed F 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's a tempting option, if you're a person who lives viscerally. But intellectually, it is untenable. As terrible a crime as rape is, I don't think it merits the death of the rapist. Perhaps castration is a more appropriate punishment. I'm not at all opposed to the death penalty, but think there are not many crimes that warrant it.
2006-08-10 10:26:06 · answer #4 · answered by sandislandtim 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
i imagine to punish any crime is to anticipate that punishment is the in hardship-free words clarification why one might want to no longer commit a criminal offense and that persons can't be relied upon to act with hardship-free decency in the route of one yet another. it is to say that this variety of regulation assumes that with out punishment human beings must be absolute to do depraved deeds - that persons are evil till compelled to be good. also with the aid of punishing some thing with death it assumes that the wrongdoer ought to under no circumstances reform and could continually attempt to do undesirable issues till you spoil them, this truly is affirming that persons can under no circumstances change for the added effective. finally a death penalty can in hardship-free words be straightforward if the regulation is infailable and no one probability free is ever wrongly convicted. If one probability free human being is improperly killed with the aid of the regulation out of fairness and equality all the different probability free human beings might want to be killed too - till the point of regulation is to be unfair and to favour some human beings over others. To finish i imagine it is a poor regulation because it nessecarily assumes anybody are evil and can't change and is nessecarily unfair and favouritist.
2016-11-29 21:04:45 · answer #5 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Only if the one who casts the first stone is free of sin --
2006-08-10 10:22:10 · answer #6 · answered by dukeraven4 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
well probably in the middleeast but not all muslims atone u for doing wrong
2006-08-10 12:12:02 · answer #7 · answered by cool6nigerian 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. It should be hanging, like it is for the perv's victim:
http://www.shoutwire.com/viewstory/4701/read
2006-08-10 10:27:11 · answer #8 · answered by Shelli 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Castration is better in my opinion...stoning is barbaric..but then again so is RAPE
2006-08-10 10:23:07 · answer #9 · answered by celine8388 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
PUNISHMENT FOR EVERYTHING IT SEEMS IS BY STONNING.
RAPIST SHOULD BE TIED TO THE GROUND WHILE PIGS EAT THEM ALIVE,.
2006-08-10 10:21:42 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋