Jump to content

Young Gay Man Executed in Iran


  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#21
Paranoid Marvin

Paranoid Marvin

    Insanely Around Sometimes

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,714 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:127.0.0.1, Scotland, UK

What the kid did was pure filth, and anyone who thinks that way is pure filth. It is a product of sick
minded individuals


And what is it you are referring to as filth?

Careful what you say there - you might make a lot of people very angry :)

#22
Alessandro17

Alessandro17

    Chief of Security

  • Administrators
  • 8,333 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sector 001, Italy

Your first quote is strange, It merely reinforces my original point. The man was executed on charges of rape, Not on charges of homosexuality.


Albeit I can't quite prove it, it would seem that "anal rape" and sodomy are being used with the same meaning:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buggery:

At common law consent was not a defence; nor was the fact that the parties were married.As with the crime of rape, buggery required that penetration must have occurred, but ejaculation is not necessary.


Your second quote is misquoted.

Your quote:
The actual quote from your linked article:
^^ That's one whole sentence, It should be quoted as one. Of course anyone is free to agree with his speculation.


I don't believe that is relevant, because in my quote:

I would guess that if this child had been accused of raping a young girl, he would not be punished in this manner. It seems that this young man, just 21 years old, was executed because he was gay.


"I would guess" means just that, it is a guess by the author.

Your third quote really has no bearing regarding my original post.


Not necessarily, but it does prove that the man was unlawfully executed.

#23
Hagar

Hagar

    Project Dogsbody

  • Administrators
  • 2,352 posts
  • Location:Over the hills & far away

Some left-wing nut bastard censored my post in an attempt to stifle the 1st amendment.
I wonder why people hate freedom so much? I guess they just want their sick opinion shown, and
no one else's.

<snip: for full post see above>

What the kid did was pure filth, and anyone who thinks that way is pure filth. It is a product of sick
minded individuals.

EDIT: I am copying this text in case the sick minded kid decides to censor my post again.



Although your opinions are widely tolerated in this forum, I would like to point out that we are under no obligation to retain any post that is considered unacceptable.
The entire tone & attitude of what is quoted above is beyond this limit, and I would suggest that you consider the fact that this is a private place, free to set its own rules, by which you have agreed to abide on registering. If you don't like the rules you are free to take your opinions elsewhere.

Secondly: Hurling abuse at the staff for attempting to do their job is kindof like throwing your drink at the bartender, i.e. you would be unlikely to feel much floor under your feet on the way out the door.

In short: show respect for other users, debate the issues & not the person & be civil: This means, for instance, explaining your objection to something or someone rather than decrying them as "pure filth" Finally, understand that there is a limit to what we are willing to put up with.

#24
OryHara

OryHara

    Mad as Hell

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 719 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:A Constitutional Republic
  • Interests:War is Peace.<br />Freedom is Slavery.<br />Ignorance is Strength.<br />...

And what is it you are referring to as filth?Careful what you say there - you might make a lot of people very angry :)

Filth is defined as something that is sick, immoral, and against God.Most Iranians call their god "Allah", and read from the Koran. However, it says very similar thingsabout such practices as my Bible does, and the punishment should fit the crime, and eye for an eyeis my opinion. However. It IS their country, and they can run their country how they wish. If deathis their law, then so be it, however I disagree, and believe death is somewhat extreme for such actions.Don't really care who I make angry. The entire world can kiss my ass as far as I am concerned. I piss peopleoff every day when I tell them Windows is {censored}, and that mammon is their false god. The little right-wing nut job false-Christians get mad when I tell them that. HAHA. The liberalsget mad when I tell them that their practices are filth. The statists get mad when I tell them thatgovernment is not God, and men do not rule over men."Men must be governed by God or they will be ruled by tyrants." - William PennIt seems to have been applied in this case. When a country becomes immoral, and full of filth, it will fall.The same as Rome, Babylon, Egypt, Persia (Iran), Atlantis, and all the other Empires that fell away from self restraint.America will do this as well since it has strayed over the past 150 years, and has tried to govern men, and other nations.

Although your opinions are widely tolerated in this forum, I would like to point out that we are under no obligation to retain any post that is considered unacceptable. The entire tone & attitude of what is quoted above is beyond this limit, and I would suggest that you consider the fact that this is a private place, free to set its own rules, by which you have agreed to abide on registering. If you don't like the rules you are free to take your opinions elsewhere. Secondly: Hurling abuse at the staff for attempting to do their job is kindof like throwing your drink at the bartender, i.e. you would be unlikely to feel much floor under your feet on the way out the door.In short: show respect for other users, debate the issues & not the person & be civil: This means, for instance, explaining your objection to something or someone rather that decrying them as "pure filth" Finally, understand that there is a limit to what we are willing to put up with.

There is a limit as to what I tolerate as well. Censorship is sick. Your opinions are tolerated because in this country we have the 1st amendment. Read it if you are uneducated about the matter, which you have expressed that you are.I am no obligation to anyone with my opinions, and neither is anyone else. Don't restrict me, and I won't restrict you.I fully respect their right to opinion, no matter how sick it is, and you should fully respect my right to my opinion, no matter what it may be.We live in a free country bucky-o-hare, not a democracy, not a dictatorship, but a constitutional Republic. If you don't like it, leave.I get the same attitude from people, and ignorant people no matter where I go. Weather they be idiot Right Wingers, or idiot left wingers,CENSOR THE OTHER SIDE OF THE FENCE. What about tearing down the fence?

#25
Azurael

Azurael

    How many Ace Rimmers does it take to change a lightbulb?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 776 posts
  • Gender:Male

Some left-wing nut {censored} censored my post in an attempt to stifle the 1st amendment.
I wonder why people hate freedom so much? I guess they just want their sick opinion shown, and
no one else's.

None the less, In countries like Iran, this is perfectly acceptable punishment in their country, and nobody
anywhere else, has the right to dictate to them how they should run their laws of their country.

In some countries if you steal, they cut your hand off. This is perfectly acceptable in this instance,
and the same principal should be applied as opposed to death. However, it is their country, and they
can do as they wish according to their beliefs.

What the kid did was pure filth, and anyone who thinks that way is pure filth. It is a product of sick
minded individuals.

EDIT: I am copying this text in case the sick minded kid decides to censor my post again.


You really are a very angry person, aren't you?

It would be nice to see some civilised debate in this forum as opposed to childish mudslinging at people; resorting to slagging off their political views as opposed to posting constructive criticism and explaining why you think your views are superior. May I point out at this juncture that mannerisms such as yours are responsible for a large proportion of the distaste for the American people which seems almost universal more than about 5 miles out of your soverign waters. But hey, we will have your freedom imposed upon us, whether we want it or not.

Frankly, I don't think we even established whether the 'offence' was consensual or not, since Sodomy is considered rape whether consensual or not in Iran. Nor did we establish whether or not he actually commited the 'crime' anyway, which seems unlikely in light of the withdrawl of the 'victims' accusations.

I don't think you can say it is reasonable in a supposedly developed world for somebody to be killed, or even persecuted just because they want to express themselves in a different manner to the majority of the population. So long as anything they do is consensual and does not harm others, I think that persecution should be considered a breach of 'global' benchmark Human Rights. Stoning people because they have commited a {censored} act is ridiculous and has no place in a civilised world.

Religious directives have throughout history been interpreted in different ways by different people. I don't care what you say about Islam and Judaism keeping to much older traditions and 'following the word of God' more closely than Chritianity and other religions, their rules have changed over the years just as much, if not more. It would be perfectly possible to interpret the rules differently to allow homosexuality, and numerous muslims outside these 'wacky' countries are perfectly sane, reasonable individuals who support the ideals of individual freedom. The fact remains that people in said countries are indoctrinated with homophobia, male chauvinism and numerous other ideas that I dare not speak of from a very young age, with the excuse that these are the teachings of a religion.

Religious figures have far too much political control, even in the world of today, and it's hard to see how they truly represent the original ideology of the religions they claim to represent, which were designed to encourage a sense of community, personal and group worth and numerous other positive concepts. I am fully in favour of people practising whatever they want so long as it harms no others, however, I feel that a separation of state and religion is essential to prevent the persecution and outcast of those with different views in today's society.

#26
Alessandro17

Alessandro17

    Chief of Security

  • Administrators
  • 8,333 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sector 001, Italy

Frankly, I don't think we even established whether the 'offence' was consensual or not, since Sodomy is considered rape whether consensual or not in Iran.


Thanks for that, it is what I have been suspecting all along.

#27
Rez.

Rez.

    InsanelyMac Geek

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 131 posts
  • Gender:Male

Albeit I can't quite prove it, it would seem that "anal rape" and sodomy are being used with the same meaning:


The Wiki link to "Buggery" is non existent, So I'm not sure where that quote came from. There's a much better definition of the word under (Believe it or not) Sodomy.

Elsewhere the legal use of the term "sodomy" is restricted to rape cases where an act such as anal penetration has taken place.


I don't believe that is relevant, because in my quote: <Snip>


If you don't see the relevance in properly quoting your sources, Then Ok.

Not necessarily, but it does prove that the man was unlawfully executed.


It proves he was the victim of a screwup in the Iranian Justice System. No bearing regarding wether he was executed for being a Homosexual, Which was my originall point.

It seems this thread is headed for a {censored}storm anyway.

#28
macgirl

macgirl

    Stargate's Pharaoh

  • Retired
  • 7,615 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Mexico City
  • Interests:Techie gadgets
Why people still thinking "this" is a country, this is NOT a country, this is a place, a virtual one that has it's data in some country.

As many countries, here, we have rules and tolerance but don't think we have your country's rules.

#29
Alessandro17

Alessandro17

    Chief of Security

  • Administrators
  • 8,333 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sector 001, Italy

The Wiki link to "Buggery" is non existent, So I'm not sure where that quote came from.


There is something wrong with redirection in Wikipedia, but search for "buggery" in Wikipedia and you'll find it.

#30
borisbadenov

borisbadenov

    InsanelyMac Sage

  • Just Joined
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 345 posts
  • Location:Hyde 2612
I thought that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made it quite clear that there were no homosexuals in Iran. Therefore, this story must be false.


Some left-wing nut {censored} censored my post in an attempt to stifle the 1st amendment.
I wonder why people hate freedom so much? I guess they just want their sick opinion shown, and
no one else's.


Is this at all a surprise to you? Liberals tolerate other viewpoints only as long as you agree with them. Take the term "bipartisan". If a liberal cannot advance their agenda, they will blame it on the lack of bipartisan support. If a conservative asks for bipartisan support, they are ridiculed for having an unpopular agenda and out of touch with the mainstream

#31
JonTheSavage

JonTheSavage

    InsanelyMac Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 423 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Whistle'n Dixie

You really are a very angry person, aren't you?

It would be nice to see some civilised debate in this forum as opposed to childish mudslinging at people; resorting to slagging off their political views as opposed to posting constructive criticism and explaining why you think your views are superior. May I point out at this juncture that mannerisms such as yours are responsible for a large proportion of the distaste for the American people which seems almost universal more than about 5 miles out of your soverign waters. But hey, we will have your freedom imposed upon us, whether we want it or not.

Frankly, I don't think we even established whether the 'offence' was consensual or not, since Sodomy is considered rape whether consensual or not in Iran. Nor did we establish whether or not he actually commited the 'crime' anyway, which seems unlikely in light of the withdrawl of the 'victims' accusations.

I don't think you can say it is reasonable in a supposedly developed world for somebody to be killed, or even persecuted just because they want to express themselves in a different manner to the majority of the population. So long as anything they do is consensual and does not harm others, I think that persecution should be considered a breach of 'global' benchmark Human Rights. Stoning people because they have commited a {censored} act is ridiculous and has no place in a civilised world.

Religious directives have throughout history been interpreted in different ways by different people. I don't care what you say about Islam and Judaism keeping to much older traditions and 'following the word of God' more closely than Chritianity and other religions, their rules have changed over the years just as much, if not more. It would be perfectly possible to interpret the rules differently to allow homosexuality, and numerous muslims outside these 'wacky' countries are perfectly sane, reasonable individuals who support the ideals of individual freedom. The fact remains that people in said countries are indoctrinated with homophobia, male chauvinism and numerous other ideas that I dare not speak of from a very young age, with the excuse that these are the teachings of a religion.

Religious figures have far too much political control, even in the world of today, and it's hard to see how they truly represent the original ideology of the religions they claim to represent, which were designed to encourage a sense of community, personal and group worth and numerous other positive concepts. I am fully in favour of people practising whatever they want so long as it harms no others, however, I feel that a separation of state and religion is essential to prevent the persecution and outcast of those with different views in today's society.


Babies know best.
Attached File  smart_kid.jpg   33.35KB   11 downloads

Its not up to you, or anyone else what Iran's leader does in his own country.

#32
gwprod12

gwprod12

    InsanelyMac Deity

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,326 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, Washington
Boris: your statement about bipartisanship is intellectually unsound. Both parties act exactly the same way in respect to bipartisanship. Had you replaced every Democrat with Republican and every Liberal with Conservative, your statement would still be true. (Unless you were being sardonic, in which case, never mind.)

The moderator, who may or may not be a left-winger, explained himself quite clearly. I thought. He himself censored one of my posts (many moons ago) and sent me a nice little note explaining why. In the US, as any constitutionalist can tell you, people have an absolute right to freedom from government interference in what they have to say. That does not mean that there aren't other consequences. I.E. The 1st Amendment will not stop someone from punching you because you called his sister a whore.

I disagree with the entire concept of censorship on the internet and I wish it hadn't been done. When anyone starts censoring stuff I don't like, inevitably stuff I do like will also be censored. I'd rather have both what I like and dislike than have neither.

If we were to start censoring [you know who] every time he called someone a name, all his posts would be gone, and he'd be forced to leave the board in shame... wait... Why was that a bad idea again?

;)

JonTheSavage: Agreed. (With provisos)

#33
Alessandro17

Alessandro17

    Chief of Security

  • Administrators
  • 8,333 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sector 001, Italy

I disagree with the entire concept of censorship on the internet and I wish it hadn't been done. When anyone starts censoring stuff I don't like, inevitably stuff I do like will also be censored. I'd rather have both what I like and dislike than have neither.


gwprod12

without censorship a forum would easily turn into a whorehouse, and we have many such examples on the internet. Is that what we want? I don't think so.

#34
JonTheSavage

JonTheSavage

    InsanelyMac Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 423 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Whistle'n Dixie

gwprod12
without censorship a forum would easily turn into whorehouse, and we have many such examples on the internet. Is that what we want? I don't think so.


Thus are the words of tyrants.

What Alessandro17 is really saying:

"Because I disagree with this person, his or her posts should be censored, and only my opinions, and my friend's opinions should be posted because we think we are right. I like free speech, as long as it applies to me, and nobody else. Anyone that disagrees with me, is a member of a.. so called whorehouse."

#35
Azurael

Azurael

    How many Ace Rimmers does it take to change a lightbulb?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 776 posts
  • Gender:Male
Look. Face it. You don't have freedom of speech on this privately-owned forum. The forum owners can set whatever rules they like, because they own the place. If you want to talk on a forum where the rules are different, start your own.

End of absolutely ridiculous discussion, OK?

#36
Alessandro17

Alessandro17

    Chief of Security

  • Administrators
  • 8,333 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sector 001, Italy

Thus are the words of tyrants.

What Alessandro17 is really saying:

"Because I disagree with this person, his or her posts should be censored, and only my opinions, and my friend's opinions should be posted because we think we are right. I like free speech, as long as it applies to me, and nobody else. Anyone that disagrees with me, is a member of a.. so called whorehouse."


A lot of nonsense, OryHara (why are you posting with another nick, BTW?)
It applies to me as to anybody else. I was reprimanded by Sabr myself once. True, I didn't find it very fair because of the story behind that single instance, but I didn't throw a fuss anyway.
If what I say isn't true, let's make an experiment: I'll call you a lot of names and let's see how do you like it.

#37
Azurael

Azurael

    How many Ace Rimmers does it take to change a lightbulb?

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 776 posts
  • Gender:Male

Babies know best.
Attached File  smart_kid.jpg   33.35KB   11 downloads

Its not up to you, or anyone else what Iran's leader does in his own country.


If he genuinely has the support of everybody in his country, then hell, you're right. I doubt you are though.

So its OK for people to be killed for something you don't consider a crime because it's happening somewhere else? Sure, you can say they could leave their countries and go somewhere free, but that's not really an option for many, is it?

I suppose you also think it was OK for the KKK to be killing black people, because the majority in the South supported it?

You are clearly an isolationist, oppressive moron, OryHara. Yet you claim to stand for Freedom, right? Just not other peoples'...

#38
JonTheSavage

JonTheSavage

    InsanelyMac Sage

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 423 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Whistle'n Dixie

If he genuinely has the support of everybody in his country, then hell, you're right. I doubt you are though.So its OK for people to be killed for something you don't consider a crime because it's happening somewhere else?Just like it was OK for the KKK to be killing black people, because the majority in the South supported it?You are clearly an isolationist, oppressive moron, OryHara. Yet you claim to stand for Freedom, right? Just not other peoples'...

Non-interventionist. Choose your words wisely. I choose not to live in an Empire. How would you like it if China came to your country, and said we don't like what you are doing, so we are going to change it?

A lot of nonsense, OryHara (why are you posting with another nick, BTW?)It applies to me as to anybody else. I was reprimanded by Sabr myself once. True, I didn't find it very fair because of the story behind that single instance, but I didn't throw a fuss anyway.If what I say isn't true, let's make an experiment: I'll call you a lot of names and let's see how do you like it.

Now you lie about it. :) That is classic.You are sounding more, and more like the Bush administration."We do not torture." :D

#39
hecker

hecker

    InsanelyMacaholic

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,669 posts
  • Gender:Male
I guess the kids in this forum aren't used to get their snouts washed out with soap these days any more, hehe.
Mom, dad, you can't tell me what to do because I'm 15 and the whole world revolves around me and my fixed ideals!

#40
Alessandro17

Alessandro17

    Chief of Security

  • Administrators
  • 8,333 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sector 001, Italy

I guess the kids in this forum aren't used to get their snouts washed out with soap these days any more, hehe.
Mom, dad, you can't tell me what to do because I'm 15 and the whole world revolves around me and my fixed ideals!


:D





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

© 2014 InsanelyMac  |   News  |   Forum  |   Downloads  |   OSx86 Wiki  |   Mac Netbook  |   PHP hosting by CatN  |   Designed by Ed Gain  |   Logo by irfan  |   Privacy Policy