Severing a man’s spine because a 1,300-year old religious legal code demands it? Yeah, try to tell me they’re civilized:
Saudi court mulls verdict to cut defendant’s spine
A court in Saudi Arabia is seeking medical advice on whether it is possible to cut the spinal cord of a man as a punishment after he was indicted of causing paralysis to another man during a fight, a local daily reported on Thursday.
The court in the northwestern province of Tabuk has sent letters to hospitals in the kingdom asking them whether the punishment to cripple the defendant by severing his spine is medically possible, the Arabic language daily Okaz said.
The unidentified defendant hit Abdul Aziz Al Mutairi, another Saudi, with a cleaver during a fight more than two years ago and the trial has been delayed because Mutairi is insisting that his attacker suffer the same injury.
I guess it makes all the difference in the world that the court is asking first if the procedure is possible; after all, they only want to cripple him for life, not kill him.
Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch summarizes the justification under Sharia law:
It’s in the Qur’an: “We ordained therein for them: ‘Life for life, eye for eye, nose or nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal.’ But if any one remits the retaliation by way of charity, it is an act of atonement for himself. And if any fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (No better than) wrong-doers.” — Qur’an 5:45
Read the rest to see why the argument that the Old Testament contains a similar argument is specious.
Okay, the guy who committed the offense is a maniac who deserves a long jail sentence for mayhem or aggravated assault, but crippling?
Mengele didn’t die in Brazil in 1979, he moved to Saudi Arabia.