Questions for Mesmorial

[MesMorial]

http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=12543#p178099

There is nothing wrong with a deterrant. What Iffo misses is my point about fair consideration. There has to be a set threshold, decided by people. Thus the verse is not worth commenting on.

It is worth discussing.

Cheers.

MM I am waiting for you on other thread and you been hiding here
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=12543#p178099

Yes my answer was hiding here

[iffo]

http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=12543#p178099

There is nothing wrong with a deterrant. What Iffo misses is my point about fair consideration. There has to be a set threshold, decided by people. Thus the verse is not worth commenting on.

It is worth discussing.

Cheers.

MM I am waiting for you on other thread and you been hiding here
viewtopic.php?f=21&t=12543#p178099

Yes my answer was hiding here

Your answer or should I say excuse has been rejected. Like I said civilized people do not lash others in public if they have sex, its non of yours or anyone else dam business. And you don't cut hands either, your deterrant stuff has been rejected.
Its a wrong punishment just like I say if your bribe I will rape you wife and call it a deterrant. And Quran does not talk about circumstance, it just makes a blanket statement 'cut hand'.

[MesMorial]

Your wife-raping comparison is rejected, because it involves another person.

[iffo]

Your wife-raping comparison is rejected, because it involves another person.

Point was that punishment is wrong, and unacceptable.
To make you happy lets change it
"If you bribe you will be raped" and call it a deterrant.
"If you gamble your one eye will be taken out" and call it a deterrant.
"if you kiss a boy your leg will be cut" and call it a deterrant.

So your deterrant excuse been rejected.

I don't want to see these kind of disgrace full/pathetic scene any where.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=fd9_1292017827

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/49644/fac ... _stealing/


Stupid 7th century book has no place in civilized world. MM take your book and flush it through toilet we do not want this any where near us.

[sum]

Hello MesMorial

Will you ever get round to giving a proper answer to my question? Will you run away for evermore?

Do you agree with crucifixion as a punishment in any circumstances?

sum

[MesMorial]

Iffo;


I will answer in simple, easy-to-understand terms.

A deterannt serves a purpose. That purpose is valid. Even the one about rape is a deterrant, just like any other.

What is important is what actually happens AFTER the crime. That is to say, there should be consideration and appropriate punishment applied. I mention this since a threshold must be set, and the Qur'an allows repentence.

[MesMorial]

Hello MesMorial

Will you ever get round to giving a proper answer to my question? Will you run away for evermore?

Do you agree with crucifixion as a punishment in any circumstances?

sum

So you want to keep summing the times I have answered you?

[sum]

Hello MesMorial

Please just give a clear yes/no answer as to whether you agree with crucifixion as a punishment in some circumstances. It shouldn`t be too difficult should it?

sum

[MesMorial]

There is no clear answer.

[iffo]

@MM
And I already told you your deterrent excuse has been rejected. Because its total BS invented by you.
These are actual punishments should be given to people according to Quran, these are not jokes your Allah is playing with humans just to scare them. These are the punishments given by Muhammad to people.

MM Every time you will try to white wash Quran ugliness you may be able to fool yourself but not others.

[sum]

Hello MesMorial

Your quote -
There is no clear answer.

If there is no clear answer to be given by you then I can logically conclude that you are keeping crucifixion as a possible option. In other words, you are not rejecting crucifixion as a punishment. Am I correct?

sum

[peterpin]

I wonder,if this can be clarified a bit more.

You seem to say that crucifixion is a deterrent. Well, a deterrent that is never used or may never be used is not a deterrent at all.

So you mean that there are some, possibly rare situations when it is acceptable, or even appropriate to crucify someone?

Imagine this scenario:

The government has decided it had enough with all the people ignoring parking regulations.Despite the ridiculously high fines people still park badly.

So,it passes a law which sets a mandatory death-sentence for false parking.

Will this work as deterrent?
Will it work if someone is actually executed?
If it helps to reduce the parking problem, is it a good law?

Now,apply that to the crucifixion issue:

Will it work as a deterrent if nobody is crucified?
Will it deter people if it is used?
Is is a fitting punishment for anything,i.e can it be just,and if so,when?

Bear in mind things like the "drawing and quartering" sentence for treason; did it stop treason?

In fact, what is the point of punishment at all?

[MesMorial]

A deterrant is the presence of possibility. The threshold must be set. Before common-sense is applied, the verse are not really worth commenting on.

I believe sum may eventually understand the implications of my responses.

Crucifiction would be reserved for crimes equally bad.

[iffo]

A deterrant is the presence of possibility. The threshold must be set. Before common-sense is applied, the verse are not really worth commenting on.

I believe sum may eventually understand the implications of my responses.

Crucifiction would be reserved for crimes equally bad.

Verses are not really worth commenting on because you have no answer for that
Consider yourself comprehensively debunked again .

[peterpin]

So, according to you, punishment is a RETRIBUTION? And the threat of punishment is a DETERRENT.

Is there any room for rehabilitation?

Also if the punishment should be as bad as the crime, what does that make the people who inflict it?

[sum]

Hello MesMorial

Your quote -
Crucifiction would be reserved for crimes equally bad.

You are now bring childishly deceptive by using the word crucifiction to avoid giving your opinion on crucifixion.

I am not sure what your own perspective is. Your quote might mean that you are simply commenting on others administering the crucifixion rather than you supporting crucifixion.

Is it your personal view that crucifixion should be a punishment in some circumstances?

sum

[MesMorial]

A deterrant is the presence of possibility. The threshold must be set. Before common-sense is applied, the verse are not really worth commenting on.

I believe sum may eventually understand the implications of my responses.

Crucifiction would be reserved for crimes equally bad.

Verses are not really worth commenting on because you have no answer for that
Consider yourself comprehensively debunked again .

But we are not talking about the Qur'an.

[MesMorial]

So, according to you, punishment is a RETRIBUTION? And the threat of punishment is a DETERRENT.

Is there any room for rehabilitation?

Also if the punishment should be as bad as the crime, what does that make the people who inflict it?

Of course there is room for rehabilitation (in some circumstances).

A dictionary will answer the last question.

[sum]

Hello MesMorial

Your quote -
Crucifiction would be reserved for crimes equally bad.

sum
You are now bring childishly deceptive by using the word crucifiction to avoid giving your opinion on crucifixion.

I am not sure what your own perspective is. Your quote might mean that you are simply commenting on others administering the crucifixion rather than you supporting crucifixion.

Is it your personal view that crucifixion should be a punishment in some circumstances?

sum

You are still running away from my question. Please answer my question.

sum

[MesMorial]

Hello MesMorial

Your quote -
Crucifiction would be reserved for crimes equally bad.

sum
You are now bring childishly deceptive by using the word crucifiction to avoid giving your opinion on crucifixion.

I am not sure what your own perspective is. Your quote might mean that you are simply commenting on others administering the crucifixion rather than you supporting crucifixion.

Is it your personal view that crucifixion should be a punishment in some circumstances?

sum

Crucifixon is logical if someone does it to somebody else (without reason). I am capable of accepting it or rejecting it, judging on context. There is no clear answer.

However, I am more inclined to reject it, since killing the person does not undo the original crime. But again, some people may disagree with me.

You are still running away from my question. Please answer my question.

sum