Stoning to Death

[ScimitarXEdge]

Faye,
It does not matter what you think is immoral and what Scimitar thinks is immoral or anybody else. It is our creator who decides what is immoral. Human beings has an ego and arrogant nature that they forget they are capable of making mistakes like you are right now.

In Africa, it was normal for men to rape infants because they believed they are purified by this act. This act was not immoral in their society. But the reality is that action is immoral, I don't care how they grew up or if it is normal in their society, it is immoral and wrong.

In the US it was normal to own a black person as a slave. At the time it was not immoral but in reality it is and I don't care if those people grew up owning one.

In Britain, at one time it was normal for Scottish brides to spend the first night with English officers, they considered this as their right and this was not considered immoral. But again in reality this was immoral and I don't care what the English have to say about it.
I can go on and on with thousands of examples.

Today you think you swimming naked on the beach with kids walking around is normal and not immoral. The fact is that it is immoral and wrong. You may think it is OK because it is socially acceptable, but you are manipulated of thinking right is wrong and wrong is right.

Exactly true Morality is an objective standard, it exists independent of cultural hues.

[AFG21]

OMG this is terrible. That is what you get when te culture is frozen for 100 of years. Pashtuns must realize that they are leaving in the 21st century not somwhere in the dark ages. They just need education. And only then such things will end. No Islamic state no Scharia can change them, because Islam had its chanse in Afghanistan and it failed. It's time for a change.





PS. sorry for the spelling mistakes I do not leave in a English speaking country..

[unknownprince]

no, Islam and Sharia brought stability and security, and it already rules most parts of Afghanistan, you filthy foreign trash pig monkey.

[ScimitarXEdge]

OMG this is terrible. That is what you get when te culture is frozen for 100 of years. Pashtuns must realize that they are leaving in the 21st century not somwhere in the dark ages. They just need education. And only then such things will end. No Islamic state no Scharia can change them, because Islam had its chanse in Afghanistan and it failed. It's time for a change.





PS. sorry for the spelling mistakes I do not leave in a English speaking country..

Truth when it comes to moral Laws is something that is related to how mankind's behaviors correspond with nature, and nature is not bound by by linear perceptions of time like the 21st century. When something is fundamentally true, it is valid even in the 21st century; anything that is false isn't education, but corruption. The real dark ages are the 21st centiry's lack of moral standards.

[Shayesta]

Shayesta jana mor shidey desa

You mean to say 'de moor shudey base'......?

do you not like Pashtunwali? What about Islam? Pashtunwali is our way, and no one can do anything about it.

Do you like to follow Pukhtunwali or Islam? Is Pukhtunwali your preferred way or Islam? And why can't you do anything about it? Because Pukhtunwali doesn't allow you to, or because Islam doesn't allow you to?

In Islam, adulterers are stoned to death. Do you agree with that?

Yes, I know in Islam a married man/woman who commits 'Zinah' is stoned to death and unmarried couples are to receive 100 lashes. In both cases, witnesses are needed, which didn't happen here.

I am merely explaining behind the reasoning of the parents to choose this option over the second one.

No, you called something which is even against Islam (stoning a couple who weren't married to someone else) 'peacefully corrected' and those who spoke out against it are being called 'Western thinkers'. Even in Islamic perspective this punishment was wrong, you don't need a Westerner to tell you why that is.

Western/secular society is "I got no shame."

Western society isn't one set society; It's a mixture of many, many societies of many backgrounds. Just because adultery happen here doesn't mean these people got no morals, no values or no heart at all. These people don't follow Islam to understand the precise reasons of why adultery is wrong (as explained in the Quran-e-Sharif), on the other hand you got Muslims who follow rules like Pukhtunwali even though they know why the punishment they gave in this circumstance was wrong.

In western societies, the governments are strong and it is they who decide what should be promoted and protected.

And it's also them protecting many other rights in their countries; Racial rights, religious rights, violation rights and etcetera being a few of them. Here in UK, Pakistanis and Bangladeshis are most under-achieved immigrants of the UK, but the British law will never let them be violated just because they are of no use to the British economy; All because of the protection laws in this country. As I said, just because these people don't happen to be Muslims (or even religious at all) and practise adultery doesn't mean every single thing here is happening for wrong reasons. I by the way still don't understand how adultery between individuals is beneficial to their economy?

It is a system with no compassion for humanity or nature that is self destructive.

Yeah, especially compared to the humanity of Pukhtunwali. Cough cough. And once again, these people aren't followers of Islam, we are. They don't know what's going to happen with them in next life, we do.

But what you have here is two individuals that knowingly committed a crime in the society they live in that jeopardized the lives of their innocent relatives.

Khushal'a, what crime? By eloping? What about the crime their parents were going to commit by forcing them into another marriage? If Islam allows individuals to rise against forced marriages then what the hell is Pukhtunwali? So what is their crime? Ditching Islam? Or ditching Pukhtunwali?

Was their "love," "infatuation" or "lust" for each other more important than the lives of their innocent relatives, was it more important than their whole family's safety.

Was their parents' selfishness more important than their innocent children's lives? Was it more important than Islamic rules which forbids forced marriages? It wasn't them who brought destruction upon their families, it was their families who brought destruction upon everyone. And if it was merely a lust then they wouldn't have cared enough to elope in first place and if they did, then they wouldn't have returned afterwards.

I very much doubt in the society that this happened, prostitution, alcohol and etc are openly happening.

Sure. Enquire about Hira Mandi, rising male prostitution in Pakistan, abduction of little boys in Afghanistan, women of Kabul who in broad daylight are brought to foreign bases in Jeeps every week; Just a few to name. It's not that these people are impossible to find, it's just that no one will focus 'such petty matters'.

You can call a pashtun "qooni" in the west and I doubt anything will happen. You call that same pashtun "qooni" in Quandahar in front of his "turbur" and your mouth will be broken.

Meet Pukhtoons in my college, even if you called them 'idiot' they will break your jaws. Same-wise, use the term to a Panjsheri in Kabul, you think he is just going to giggle at you because he hasn't followed Pukhtunwali?

It is not that pashtuns decision to break your mouth. It is the pashtunwali that obligates him to break your mouth because he is in a society that will shun him if he can not stand for his rights, his dignity.

LOL, so if there was no Pukhtunwali you could have saved your life by calling a random man 'gay'? If you call any Afghan with the same term he will break your neck and I am very sure not every Afghan follows Pukhtunwali.

people are manipulated to follow the norm of the society they live in.

Even before Islam people were manipulated to follow many other norms and values, did that discourage Muslims to spread Islam? Some of the members made very good points here. Empires, oppressors, looters, etcetera didn't fall on their own, it took us (those living under it) to fight and eliminate the oppression. And like Scimitar, you also justify Pukhtunwali by calling it 'a norm of society' while don't delay for even a second when calling Western society immoral. Just because people are 'manipulated' to live in a society like Pukhtunwali doesn't mean it's the right thing to live under.

In the west, you see young girls wearing mini skirts because of peer pressure, no one is putting a gun to their head but the vast majority are doing it any ways.

That's no pressure, mate. I personally find this 'be up-to-date with fashion hard-core' way too silly and meaningless, but that's the choice people make. No one was putting guns of heads of those women in Kabul either to wear skirts, but they did. Why? Because it was their choice.

Is it morally right for underage girls or any age for that matter to dress in a sexually provocative manner,

With under-aged girls I assume you mean under sixteen year old's (under-aged per British law) and a vast majority of under-aged girls I have seen don't really wear sexually provocative to be honest. But you have exceptions everywhere; Here you got under-aged girls totally blinded by fashion by choice, back home you got under-aged girls totally pushed into a marriage by force. To you under-aged girls way too much into fashion may be immoral, to someone else under-aged girls forced into a marriage may be immoral; But what's is immoral in Islam?

In rural Pashtunland, you see girls practicing compete "purda" and in urban pashtunland they wear a "tekri" with the face showing.

You can't simply compare adjustment of way of dressing with adjustment of force. Even Islam recommends women to be as covered as possible, despite of the society you live. But Islam never recommended to adjust to forced marriages; Despite of the society you live in.

Once upon a time homosexuality was shunned in America, today it is socially acceptable. Is the American society manipulated into accepting this or are they forced to accept it.

I personally wouldn't like to say much about homosexuality because I am still unsure whether it's a born case with people, or a developed one? If they are born with it and it's considered a disease then we should fight against it, not kill it. And if considered normal then I have to think about Islam's stand on it. Here in West in many places homosexuality might be very well accepted but by far not as much practised, there on the other hand you got Afghanistan where homosexuality is looked down upon but yet highly practised. Now whom to blame?; People who practice it? Or society which allows it?

In pashtun societies, families are not just your brothers and sisters. they are extended through paternal linkage. It is almost impossible to stop a blood feud over something like this.

Even acceptance of Islam seemed impossible when people had different religions, now it's the most normal thing ever. Even after 9/11 it seemed impossible to practise Islam in West, in return it became the fastest growing religion in West. Nothing is impossible mate. If you sincerely wish to make a change, nothing is impossible. Revenge in Pukhtoon lands is very common and about the slightest things. These things shouldn't be accepted because it seems impossible; They should be fought against and replaced with rules of Islam. You can't protect it in name of society or Pukhtunwali, because in name of Islam this is exactly what you think the Western society is; Immoral. If there is not excuse for other culture which clash with Islam, then why should there be any excuse for Pukhtunwali's clash with Islam?

Pashtunwali put all those invaders through hell.

Pukhtunwali didn't destroy their (foreigners') lands, they (foreigners) destroyed ours. Pukhtoons might have given them a tough time, they nonetheless (compared to us) lost nothing my friend.

Pashtunwali existed before America and Russia.

That's not what I said. I said it's us, Pukhtoons, who created Pukhtunwali and it's us, Pukhtoons, who can rectify many aspects of it. Not foreigners'.

People are obligated to follow the law of the society that they live in whether they like or not.

Once again, we make a society, a law. Not the other way round. If you for example aren't happy with Western society then you always got the option to go back to Afghanistan, no one will stop you. But if someone isn't happy with society of Pukhtunwali, is he even allowed to get out of it? Is it even fair on him? 'Whether they like it or not' is not an option, nor an excuse. That would be called, indeed, immoral.

Believe it or not, it is because of Pashtunwali, or maybe it is the all powerful ISI.

Pukhtoons weren't the only 'warriors'; Many non-Pukhtoons lost their lives too and not because of Pukhtunwali, but for the sake of freedom. Jihad is a rule of Islam, not Pukhtunwali. Did we not have Pukhtunwali, we would have Islam to fight for. Once again, that's not an excuse.

[Shayesta]

well then do it, no point in saying could bes when they can't be done.

They can and I have done it, it's a different thing you turned an blind eye towards it. As usual.

because forced marriages have am anthropological social organizational purpose; adultery doesn't.

What purpose Scimitar, what purpose? And why is that purpose valid and adultery not?

I never said prevented, I said work against them in other ways.

You work against something so you can prevent it in the future, same thing here.

Addressing the issue in other manners, jirga, analysis, logical debate.

And you seriously believe parents who force marriages are going to hold 'Jirgas' about whether they should proceed with their force? Or you really think those who are being forced in a marriage will be listened to by solving this through a Jirga? What did a Jirga in this case solve anyway? False promise and eventually death?

because adultery breaks family structure and regulates reproductive cycles and opportunities outside of it's natural framework.

And how does a forced marriage not do the same? Go back to Afghanistan and see the miserable lives those women who were forced in a marriage lead and look at the mentality their children were brought up with. And this goes for millions and millions of Muslims, by the way. Compare that to the lives adultery has destroyed.

Marriage exists to regulate reproductive behavior and sexuality, adultery is contradiction to regulation; hence is disruptive.

And can't the same be said about forced marriages? Now Scimitar, answer this question of mine very, very carefully; Do you even know that in Islam a forced 'Nikah' per Islamic rules is actually invalid? So aren't the couple, in that case, committing adultery by living together without being married per Islam? Aren't their parents who forced them supposed to be the sinners and the ones to receive the actual punishment? Now don't confuse (arranged) marriages with forced marriages, there is a world of difference there.

Your argument is the farangay paradigm.

Until and unless you don't come up with Islamic arguments rather than Pukhtunwali ones, don't tell me whose arguments are how alienated. Thanks.

Yes, and are completely stupid.

Don't call them stupid, say 'Tobah Khudaya' a hundred times and thank Him for not bringing you to this world as an Afghan woman between wars. These girls were maximum 14 years old when they were married off to someone at least three decades their senior and previously married. They are ill-treated by their parents, their husbands, their husband's children from previous marriages, their in-laws and there is absolutely no one who can help them out; No tribal elder, no Imam, no nothing. Even though Islam does allow women to get out of such an abusive marriage, their parents won't let them. And if she decides to live for her parents and the society, their in-laws won't let them. Unlike some, they are human-beings who are fed up of life, fed up of injustice and fed up of oppression. If you can't help them get justice then out of fear for Allah Subhan'a Wa Tallah'a, don't call them stupid because you aren't unlucky enough to go through what they are going through. If the society ignores Islam while oppressing women, then why the hell should women accept the society and ignore their oppression; An Islamic sin?

I don't know the details; but none of these women committed adultery did they?

Nor is that the reason for these two whose video I posted! They had fled their home and when they came back, without asking whether they got married or not, they were accused of 'Zinah' and stoned to death. This is the point you have been ignoring throughout this thread. Instead of calling others 'Ferangian' or 'Westernised' or praise your own illogical arguments while ridiculing others', why don't you think of an Islamic solution for this issue? Islam requires witnesses for Zinah, which they didn't have in their case! And how would they? Did someone see them commit Zinah before they fled? If yes how did they manage to flee afterwards with their belongings and without being punished straight-away? If they committed Zinah after they had fled then who witnessed their 'sin' while they were out of sight? If they (tribal elders and their parents) had just 'assumed' the couple had committed Zinah because they were away for a while then still their assumption is invalid because every accusation without any witness/evidence is, per Islam, invalid.

Public cinema, stories, youth talk. hear-say? It comes through the grapevine.

Scimitar, if you want women back home to be treated like animals then just say so. Why do you insult their circumstances by calling them romantic brainwashed fanatics? Public cinemas in villages of Laghman, Kunar, Faryab, Pashtun-Kot and etcetera don't even exist; And these incidents mostly happen in villages. How more stooped can you get with your so-called logical arguments just to prove Pukhtunwali right?

But the problem is merely reversing the order of something doesn't make the converse true.

And why doesn't it make true? I am still not able to find one solid point to why you think forced marriages are more acceptable than adultery? Give me one justified clarification for forced marriages (taking Islam into account) as to why forced marriages are more acceptable than adultery?

whatever we understand as "happy" are just conditions which are conducive to our faculties and help to fulfill their functions and purpose; the outward sensation we associate with happiness

In normal words, happiness (according to you) is just an illusion of mind? Then tell me, why was Mohammad Salalahu Alaihe Wasalam's marriage considered a 'happy' marriage? Why does Islam say when marrying your children off take into consideration their 'happiness'? Now is Islam promoting 'Farangi' illusions as well?

And thus they are responsible for their crimes and chose to do the wrong thing and thus they become reprehensible for their choices.

But there is no proof that they committed adultery either? That's the accusation they got upon them for fleeing their village? Now tell me, what is your stand now?

Animals kill out of instinct, humans kill for purpose, at least most of the time.

Even Russians killed Afghans for a purpose, even Americans are killing Afghans for a purpose, even Mujahideen were killing Afghans for a purpose, even the Taliban are killing Afghans for a purpose; Does that mean it's a valid one? Just because it's done out of a 'purpose'?

Well, technically, in Islamic Law unmarried persons are not deemed adulterers, but fornicators, and the punishment for fornication is much lighter than adulterry, Fornication just involves lashing.

Then why isn't the correct thing happening? And why are you still supporting this law; Pukhtunwali? You are very rapid in calling Western society immoral where it clashes with Islam, but at the same time shy away by calling Pukhtunwali immoral even though many of it's aspects clash with Islam? Why the double-standard? Or am I being 'white-washed' again?

Like wise those who rebel against parental authority similarly violate their parents right of authority.

Parents right of what? Ruining their children's lives? Forcing them into a marriage?; An Islamic sin? Even they (the children) could argue that per Pukhtunwali they tarnished their families' honour but Islamic seen saved their parent's from committing a sin. How are you going to oppose that one?

Now like I said I'm not advocating forced marriages I however am saying the comparison of forced marriages with adultery is a fallacious one.

And this is what I am asking you; Why? In Islam with capital letters it's said that adultery is a sin because it disturbs a society while forced marriage is a sin because a forced marriage is never considered valid in Islam to begin with. Islam has given full right to couples to get out of a forced marriage, so per Islam this couple hasn't even committed a sin; Because they wanted to prevent forced marriages.

However, the rough environment of Afghanistan may necessitate forced marriages. You don't need adultery to accomplish any of this.

Aha, forced marriages are necessary looking at a country's environment; That's why without any exception it's considered a sin? Mate, who do you think you are kidding? I will tell you why forced marriages are more appealing to you; Because it has been going on for centuries and maybe thousands of years, you are so used to the idea of forced marriage that it seems necessary to you. Same-wise, adultery has been going on in West for quiet a while now which is why people are so used to it, that's why it seems a necessary practise for them (those who practise it). And now per Islam; Both are a sin, both are punishable and both are considered immoral. A Islamic fact, deal with it.

The Tribal elders may have given them refuge but they realized they were protecting immorality and by doing so would be sowing dischord in society that is already rife with dischord.

No no no, they didn't realize anything. They knew damn well they would kill them off in name of 'Zinah'. This couple had fled for a while already and they might even have got married (which most couples do when they flee) but they were never given a fair trial. You can twist and turn it all you want, per Islam, it's the 'punisher' who has committed a sin. Not those receiving it. And how can one 'violate' Pukhtunwali? Pukhtunwali itself is a violation!

because their Imperialism has destabilized our planet and have inhibited the Natural way of life and habitat of our environments, I hope that I can learn enough about how this society operates and how to uproot it's impact on our planet; then hopefully we can have everything return back to our normative standards again.

Excuses, excuses and more excuses! Where there is a will there is a way, not excuses. You are here because you know you are better off here. It's not the so-called Western Imperialism which makes life difficult for Afghans in Afghanistan; It's our own thinking which pushes is back even before Islam.

No forced marriages shouldn't be deemed a crime on the same level as adultery,

For a millionth time; Why? For a change, give an Islamic reason, why?

We're debating punishment for adultery; not forced marriages, forced marriages does not cause adutery; the proof being nost forced marriages aren't adulterers.

I haven't been telling you fairy-tales all those while, I was talking forced marriage all this time! If you can discuss adultery then why not forced marriages? Because per Islam you can't find any justified reason for it?

There's an anthropological purpose for forced marriages; maintaining social sexual order. adultery is sexual disorder.

A disorder is mainly associated with illness and a ill person needs to be treated, not stoned to death. And in Islam unmarried couples aren't getting 100 lashes over stoned to death for nothing; That's so the couple can learn from their actions, repent it and never repeat it again. As far as the married couple are concerned, they receive straight death because they always got an option to get out of their marriage if they aren't happy with their partners, which they obviously don't choose to do. You are talking as if those who are forced into marriages were a bunch of sexually frustrated creatures who were bound to commit Zinah, LOL.

Hence forced marriages at least has a legitimate basis, albeit misguided application. But nothing in adultery has that same function.

Per Islam, what is the legitimated basis of forced marriage? Be careful, I asked for Islamic view, not Pukhtunwali one. And about adultery, there are in fact people who justify adultery (including prostitution) as part of good health and in some countries even to prevent rapes. How about those people give these as a reason for adultery? How can you proof them wrong? How is their point of view of adultery illogical and yours of forced marriage logical?

Protecting adulterers may have created war between tribes, thereby to evade this war they saw it better to allow these adulterers to be punished.

And once again you ignoring this point per Islamic view; Again, adultery was just an excuse here. They had eloped, that's why they got punished. You think they were that stupid to come back to the village if they knew the villagers think (or knew) they committed adultery? Are we killing logics here or what?

If I were to administer our principles here I would be jailed or potentially jailed.

At least you won't be stoned to death, be sure of that. Here in West you are allowed to propose your ideas, in Pukhtunwali that's not even an option.

However people here administer adultery and practice it with absolutely no legal recourse against them. It's legal for them to do such a thing and even protected under their respective constitutions.

If those who stone people for wrong assumptions to death can be protected per Pukhtunwali (like those in the video I posted), or those who created disasters for Muslims in the entire world can be protected per Pukhtunwali (Osama), if those who commit a sin per Islam by forcing their children into marriages can be protected per Pukhtunwali (parents), then why not prostitutes in West? It's you who calls the West immoral and Pukhtunwali the rule of morality, then why would you even think of comparing an Islamic country with a immoral one?

My presence here is not due to the virtue of the society but because of circumstance.

That wasn't my point. My point was that if these countries were so valueless and immoral, you wouldn't be here. You are here because, unlike in Pukhtunwali, you are free here to practice your believes, morals and values. And you enjoy it, you know you do. Then why don't you wish the same opportunities for your fellow Pukhtoons back home?

But just because bacha bazi happens doesn't mean we should just let any immorality happen.

Bachabazi happens very open in many places. If you go to Afghanistan, some people will advice you not to go to a certain area as it's full of 'Bachabazan', why don't these respected elders carry a bunch of supporters with rocks to stone them to death? And then they dare to point fingers at two so-called adulterers against whom there aren't even witnesses?; Which is an Islamic requirement?

I don't know if sex change operations are the "norm" of Iran. they may happen there but they're not given any special commercial license, it is a misguided medical treatment,

Nothing in Islamic countries are really given a license, but they happen and not in too much of a secret either. Things like sex-change operations, facial surgeries and homosexuality happen in Iran very often but that doesn't mean these things became their culture; Same-wise not entire Holland practices prostitution, nor are they proud of it. Go to any village in Holland and ask them what they think about the 'Red Lights'.

Buying and selling women is not a norm of Arab society, that's just absurd, it is simply a patent lie.

Mate, this is what Arabs are known for in many countries; Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India and in Pakistan especially a good example have been the orphaned Afghan refugee females who were destined an Arab husband for just one night. Now you figure out for yourself what that means. Besides this you will find Arab channels where men are in full covered Arabic clothing, while their women half-naked please them through belly-dancing. It happens on-air, very openly. See how in each country norms and values differ for each individual?

[faye]

only problem is.....I don't view your ways as freedom, but rather slavery to illusion and dysfunctionality. you can keep it ....I hope one day your entire society becomes a living horror movie, you deserve no better.

haha, such a high moral standard you have, cursing me and so many others
i personally would like to see muslim countries fare better.

[SroZaro Aslaha]

@ ScimitarXEdge +++

I must apologize for being too rash over stating their actual reasons for their escape. I do not know the full story and the details of this case so I can’t deny nor defend their actions. I also apologize if I may have come forth as someone who's against Pukhtoonwali - don't get me wrong. Pukhtoonwali has many good sides to it which I'll come back to later in my post. My main care is for the verdict of the death penalty the citizens agreed upon like in the old days. I know it’s difficult to examine whether the couple did have sexual intercourse while they were together or not. But it’s not impossible to find out. There are ways to summon a female doctor for further examination. This was not done here, which clearly shows that the parents did not care much for seeking the truth and bringing forth the core of the problem to society. Due to fear of being an outcast in the society they responded rashly and threw in the towel at the expense of the ‘culprits’.

We can’t look at this case with a pinch of salt – there is more groundwork to deal with and it’s essentially my aim to put that into the scope so these kinds of tragedies do not occur. Let me explain to you in short lexis what Pukhtoonwali really is. Viewed from a panoramic state- what’s good in Pukhtoonwali is of the utmost finest, while what’s bad is of the utmost worst. Let’s have a look at some of the most important conventions in our culture that assembles our lifestyle and I’ll prove to you why solving these problems like these parents did here is NOT 100% Pukhtoonwali and neither is it fully done by Islamic law. It’s merely bits and pieces of both. Our cultural systems most important regulations[as far as I know] are hospitality, forgiveness/amnesty, mediation, honour, blood-revenge, asylum and blood recompense. [do pitch inn if I've forgotten any other vital credits]

Hospitality – Afghan people are extremely attentive towards their guests. The host makes sure that their guests get the very best of hospitality he can provide. A people who doesn’t allow destitution stand as an obstacle for providing a guest with the best one has – is by far one of the greatest values we have. It’s honourable, upright, and logically appropriate as it builds bridges at the expense of no one.

Forgiveness or amnesty – In Pashto language, this is what we call ‘’Nanawateh’’. The definition of this term is if a family or one member of a family or a tribe has done wrong to another family or tribe (especially in relations to murder, violence, kidnapping, severe property damage done intentionally or unintentionally) and they wish to uphold amnesty, then that person at fault has to personally go himself or send a ‘’jirga’’ (group of elders, the accused person included) to the victimized family and ask for forgiveness. More often than not, they will be given forgiveness. This, again, is a very desirable way of solving grudges and disputes among people.

Mediation – Whenever there is animosity or fights between two families, groups, tribes or individuals, then a ‘’jirga’’ outside from these two parts mediate to bring peace between the two in feud. If there are elder women that mediate, then out of respect both parts will definitely put their arms down. Where do we see these codes practised nowadays? Honestly – these things have merely survived in rural places in Afghanistan where most of the inhabitants are not aware of who Bin Laden or what a cell-phone is. Meaning – these folks go by the codes their ancestors’ centuries ago constructed and their lifestyle is not polluted by fear from the outside. These are the real Pukhtane.
.
Honour – This is a very misinterpreted idiom with a lot of criticism encircled especially in the Western nations unfortunately because it’s closely intertwined with ‘’honour killings’’. However, in Afghan culture, honour means that a family, tribe or individual has certain imperative values which avow their place in the society. If those values are demeaned by someone, then it is that family/tribe or persons obligation to defend those values. A person’s honour is his family, his property, his nation and pride.

Blood Revenge – this is a typical Afghan tradition whenever amnesty is not carried out. Amnesty is therefore a vital custom that needs to be implemented if both parts want peace. Here you can see that there is a red thread going through all these points – in the case of blood revenge – one has the opportunity to obtain peace by executing ‘’Nanawateh’’, if that does not occur, then the defending of one’s’ honour ensues.

Asylum– if a person from anywhere asks an Afghan for asylum and he’s given that – then the Afghan will have to refuge and protect the asylum seeker as long as he’s in his territory. Example: during the 2nd World war the Russian authorities demanded the hand-over of German diplomats, and the Afghan government held a general national assembly where they discussed the matter and then decided that as long as those diplomats were guests in Afghan territory, they would not be handed-over. The German diplomats were later safely delivered back to their own country. Another example is when Iran’s King Nader Shah Afshar attacked Afghanistan and later invaded India. On his way back, while on Afghan territory, he was assassinated by his own soldiers, and they attempted to loot his treasure. When the Afghan people heard what happened, they immediately gave protection to King Nader Shahs whole family, treasure and belongings and returned them safely to Teheran despite him being an invader in Afghanistan. This is called ‘’Panah’’. These are principles with good intention, but can sometimes (although rarely) be misused – such as the case with Bin Laden.

Blood recompense – This is another way to abolish a dispute between two families. The family at fault will negotiate by offering to give away their daughter (a virgin) off for marriage. This is not considered a ‘gift package’ [as some westerners may see it since it appears that way for those who are not familiar with the families’ history and our culture]. It is specifically meant to make amends with the family that’s been offended.

The negative outcomes of Blood Recompense are:

• That the girl may be too young to decide for herself, or she may not want to be married off – which by definition violates the Islamic law.

• If she’s an adult and accepts the marriage, it is done in the act of avoiding the murder of her father or brother in the future [Blood feud]. So she’s paying for something she never did.

• Once married off - her bondage with her previous family can be completely cut off if her husband wants it that way - and her parents can’t do anything about it. Her new family [especially the women – don’t hate me ladies, but this is true] usually treat her horrendously, she can get beaten, be forced to do inhumanely hard labour, and be openly distinguished in the family by letting her eat leftover or eat alone, sleep alone or in a barn outside ++etcetera. The punishments can exceed to countless volumes of tales. More often than not the girl tries to commit suicide – if she fails to do that – she’ll try to escape for sanctuary in her previous home which leads to nothing more than her being returned back to her husband by her father or brother. When she gets back – her life is clinging on a thin thread. And the atrocities continue.

• If the girl commits suicide, or the family does not have a daughter – a blood revenge feud is almost inevitable – and innocent young sons and brothers will have to pay the price.

The positive outcome is that it brings peace among the two families and there is a huge avoidance of innocent bloodshed.

These parents did not do their job thoroughly when not raising their children in the full awareness of the dangers ahead. Neither did they present the loopholes that you can find in our culture which can benefit everyone to at least some extent. Because of this failure – they broke both the Islamic law and the basic laws of human rights. ‘Pukhtoonwali’ and ‘Islam’ are used an excuse for these barbaric actions which is ridiculous! With that being said; I blame the direction in which our Pukhtoonwali is wearing off to more than the parents’ misguidance here. Through Afghan history – there have been countless incidents where the girl has been ‘caught’ having affairs – but the punishment hasn’t always necessarily been death. She’s been punished by lashing, given away as a servant or sometimes even married off to an elderly chief of a tribe who’s highly respected in the society [carried out as a sort of nanawateh or recompense to the society]. I believe, in the old days, people within Pukhtoonwali had more urge and will to play the role of judging as fair as possible. Nowadays, our fellow brethren [especially Pukhtane] are in so much fear of losing more and more Afghans to western lifestyle or infidelity [and the sort] that they act rationally without paying attention to the real problem and hastily aim to bring fear among the society instead of teaching them right from wrong. There were no lessons here to be taught. No one got any insight from these actions. We’re not barbarians like the Vikings or the Romans were who after each battle put the enemies’ heads on stakes as a warning to outsiders – and that’s what’s going on. Putting up ‘examples’ to create fear...

An example of a blood feud battle between two families [which is still ongoing] that was in progress during Amanullah Khans period, had countless bloodshed – but even during those critical times- they had certain principles that were not to be broken; such as prohibition of killing women and children, not attacking the enemy while being a guest in his home, always giving the deceased the respect of praying for his soul after his death [an honouring funeral] and etcetera. Often, when a household’s headmaster had been killed, and there were no ‘men’ left alive to take care of the women and children, the tribe or community they belonged to often helped the victims family with means to survive. The Pukhtoon society sort of meant this aid as a small token for the unfortunate incident that was unavoidable according to our honourable customs. The eldest or most respected woman is also given the choice of deciding to re-marry or not. No women and or children were being held accountable for their tragic fate - a very succoured people despite their harsh side. Those men of those times in those conditions had the right idea of what Pukhtoonwali is. Today’s Pukhtane are all about fear and power – a complete pathetic bunch of bearded idiots who has adjusted those codes to their own beneficence while at the expense of others

The comment I made about ‘not being divine’ has crucial meaning in all of this and is by far from ‘irrelevant’. Divinity is perpetual. An energy or power that we can’t see, point out, accuse or explain, and because of this we can’t demand accountability of its decisions and the outcomes of those. So if a person or a society deems someone else’s life a crime without a fair trial, real analysis of the case done according to a set of guidelines – and then deploys a death penalty on the accused – they are clearly enacting as a divine union without realising it. Isn't that itself a sin? Who'll punish these parents for their sinful act?

My set of views has nothing to do with ‘farangyan manipulative ideas’ or ‘western brainwashing’ nonsense. I wasn’t given a heart and brain just to follow a leader blindly without asking questions. I know very well how corrupted, disgusting, and frankly humiliating lifestyle the ‘white man’ lives, and I’d never want that for my daughter or son in the future – but I don’t believe for a second that stoning to death or forcing a matrimony is way better than prostitution or adultery in the west . All these actions are wrong, and should be dealt with with an immediate decisiveness. In fact – they’re all apparatus that fuels the egocentric patriarchal system in both societies. So yes! We are a part of a system, but to make it function so that it favours most – we can’t do it in the matter of which this case was done. I don’t know what this is – but it’s neither Pukhtoonwali nor is it Sharia. Those who claim otherwise belong either to the newer generation of Paki whimsical slash hypocritical bearded Pukhtane who only picks bits and pieces from a mix bowl of Pukhton regulations, or they’re a bunch of immensely bigoted goons that are so scared of the so-called ‘farangyan’ influence that they completely forget where they really come from and as a result spread a wave of panicky paranoia amongst the citizens. What's ironic and quite amusing is that our people don’t realize that their behaviour creates exactly what the Americans have created among their own citizens – a society that is run and established by a bunch of pathetic xenophobic loons.

[unknownprince]

I notice there are some secular trash stinking propagandists here who hate Pashtunwali, and because their ass has been whooped, they are speaking out against Pashtunwali and Islam. They really just hate the rural pashtuns, and they disguise their hatred for Islam by talking about Arabs. Well here is some news, Arabs have lost Islam and mostly are just as trashy as these secular filth. These secular filth are traitors to the Afghan nation, and inshAllah will never feel welcome in Afghanistan or any other Muslim land.

Islam and Pashtunwali will always rule Afghanistan, and there is nothing that can be done about it.

[ScimitarXEdge]

SroSro Aslasha

that's not the standard interpretation of Pashtunwali that is normative for Pashtuns. Also note I'm not advocating Pashtunwali.

More concrete references do not imply what you have in fact your description of nanawatey is follows;

http://www.khyber.org/culture/pashtunwali.shtml

<H2>Nanawatey

Nanawatay derives from the verb to go in and is used when the vanquished party is prepared to go in to the house or hujra of the victors and beg forgiveness. There is no nanawatay when the dispute involves tor or injury to women.

</H2>

[SroZaro Aslaha]

Yes true but these people's planning and thinking is for a short period of time. They think about only this world and worldly things. They skip the thought of a life which has no end. They think of this world is everything for them.

And with such came the connoisseur of the pious teachings who rose above the separatists and thought he was the final ordeal. Are you defending these acts by the Islamic religious law, or by the merits in our Pukhtoonwali?

Planning and thinking is for a short period of time?

This is a load of nonsense – pretty much generalising millions of people. I’m a believer. I believe in living righteous in this world no matter where I’ll end up when I’m dead. I do care where I'm headed otherwise I would've forcefully had sex with countless of gorgeous women, become an inciter for some underground crime activity, robbed all those tea-baggers for all the cents they have and lived my few months like living in a dream. A true gem of a few moments I'd toast myself. Problem is, I DO care where I'm headed, and thus I don't want to spoil my chance at having it with 72 priceless virgins in heaven. Just like YOU do!

This has nothing to do with belief folks! I wouldn’t trust my ‘’fellow brethren’’ one bit if it comes to deciding someone else’s life– especially when they won’t be held accountable if the judging is proved wrong later on. If that was my sister that ran away with that guy, well, first of all, I don’t believe my sister would do such a thing without consulting at least someone in the family with whatever the problem. My parents may be very strict, but they’ve made it clear that anything is up for discussion as long as you let them be aware of your opinions so the family can have a fair chance to discuss it. But let's say she still ran away, the last thing I would do is to let a stranger stone her to death. I wouldn’t let any idiot outside my family touch her. I’d skin him alive if he’d come close. She evidently hurt me and MY family – so why the hell would it please me to see strangers firing rocks at her? Letting a bunch of Khalqis stoning my little sister? No way, out of the question. I’d never let that person see the light of dawn as long as I was still breathing. Call me a loon will you, but that’s MY thoughts of MY little family in this twisted screwed up world where no one can be trusted. I love my siblings, and if she did something as wrong as that – I’d blame myself for not teaching her correctly. I’d never murder her. The family can disown her, I won’t object, they can cut ties with her completely and let her off on her own – I still would not object, but I’d never let anyone, any human being kill her. It’s simply not their right. Period!

Most of the part why I’d never succumb to Islamic or ethnocentric doctrines blindly is because I know people made some of those rules and ideas and humans have the tendency of screwing perfectly good things up. In a case like this, I'd never succumb because I know if I ever am in real deep **** [speaking of experience] where my life would be at stake, no one else than my own family – brothers, sisters and parents would be there for me. No elders from the Pukhtoonwali society, no Afghans with their Jainamaz or Quaransharif would care to come to the rescue, or even bother sparing a prayer or two for me, or give me blessing but my own flesh and blood. And that is how a brother should think of his sister and vice versa. Don’t get me wrong, this is not a tale of an epiphany or anything. I have always known that I would protect my siblings from any harm that may befall them, but certain incidents in my life have helped adding to my conviction further that’s all. I’ll worry about answering to God in my own way – and you worry about answering to whatever you believe in when the time comes. In an overall definition at matter; attacking a persons belief just because they think this is a wrong way to deal with infidelity is just a gormless defence mechanism. By thinking that way, you've actually crossed another Islamic imperative - i.e. you are not to judge another persons faith.

Please have in mind that we need to correct the trail of system, not the pebble that runs on it. The pebble eventually vaporizes, but the citric system is eternal as long as the Lord allows it.

-----

[ScimitarXEdge]

They can and I have done it, it's a different thing you turned an blind eye towards it. As usual.

You did it, but very incorrectly; you commited what is known in Logic as Converse error, you assumed that if a Condition is True that means its Converse is also true. But P-->Q does not mean Q-->P

in other words just because forced marriages have an anthroppoligical function does not mean that adultery does as well.

What purpose Scimitar, what purpose? And why is that purpose valid and adultery not?

Purpose of Forced marriage is to ensure lineal patterns and organization; The and adultery does not serve this purpose because it is impulse driven and outside of the mold of familial structure, but its very definition.

You work against something so you can prevent it in the future, same thing here.

Not the same thing here, because their actions aren't preventing anything, it rather took something acceptable and opted for what was unacceptable.

And you seriously believe parents who force marriages are going to hold 'Jirgas' about whether they should proceed with their force? Or you really think those who are being forced in a marriage will be listened to by solving this through a Jirga? What did a Jirga in this case solve anyway? False promise and eventually death?

Whether they are or not; those are what the appropriate options are; You don't rob a bank because Banks won't give you a loan. You don't commit adultery, just because your parents want to marry you to your cousin. That's destructive.

If forced marriages are wrong in your opinion, then adultery is even more wrong; and two wrongs cannot make a right, not to sound cliche'

And how does a forced marriage not do the same? Go back to Afghanistan and see the miserable lives those women who were forced in a marriage lead and look at the mentality their children were brought up with. And this goes for millions and millions of Muslims, by the way. Compare that to the lives adultery has destroyed.

the lives of these women are miserable because of their attitude. Change their attitude and they'll be happier. Their fundamental natural needs are not being violated, just secondary ideals. You and these women are placing secondary (icing on the cake) aspects over the functional purpose of human life.

And can't the same be said about forced marriages? Now Scimitar, answer this question of mine very, very carefully; Do you even know that in Islam a forced 'Nikah' per Islamic rules is actually invalid? So aren't the couple, in that case, committing adultery by living together without being married per Islam? Aren't their parents who forced them supposed to be the sinners and the ones to receive the actual punishment? Now don't confuse (arranged) marriages with forced marriages, there is a world of difference there.

No they can't;

The Islamic Legal Procedures are only strictly binding in an Islamic State; we have no Islamic State, thereby based on the needs of the society, certain things can be amended until ideal conditions i.e. an Islamic State are placed into order. Without an Islamic State, then there is what's called Shari'ah Tab'ah, which can be losely translated as "Meta Shari'ah" but literally means Primal Order. which refers to the principle and Natural Laws which take primacy. Which can be as loose or strict as NECESSARY. Key word here being necessary.

So in these cases God understands, because they're breaking a Secondary law so that a Primary Law (Law against adultery) can be Maintained.

Until and unless you don't come up with Islamic arguments rather than Pukhtunwali ones, don't tell me whose arguments are how alienated. Thanks.

Well you're against the institution of an Islamic State from what I can grasp; I was under the impression you're a secularist; thereby your argument isn't consistent with your own approach.

I actually advocate Islamic Law; your way is the IDEAL Way, it's the way things SHOULD be; but what I'm saying here is that until that is, the way these people are doing it, is the way things HAVE to be.

Do you understand now?

Don't call them stupid, say 'Tobah Khudaya' a hundred times and thank Him for not bringing you to this world as an Afghan woman between wars. These girls were maximum 14 years old when they were married off to someone at least three decades their senior and previously married.

Which anthropologically speaking is consistent with the Natural Reproductive and Marriage Cycles of Humans. Only contemporary societies have altered this because they have created artificial interferrences with how peoples natural patterns of behavior arise.

They are ill-treated by their parents, their husbands, their husband's children from previous marriages, their in-laws and there is absolutely no one who can help them out;

Separate issue.

No tribal elder, no Imam, no nothing. Even though Islam does allow women to get out of such an abusive marriage, their parents won't let them. And if she decides to live for her parents and the society, their in-laws won't let them.

separate issue; and Islam never advocates adultery as a solution. So you're putting your foot in your mouth here.

Unlike some, they are human-beings who are fed up of life, fed up of injustice and fed up of oppression. If you can't help them get justice then out of fear for Allah Subhan'a Wa Tallah'a, don't call them stupid because you aren't unlucky enough to go through what they are going through.

They're stupid because of their solutions to things are stupid. I'm not saying they're stupid for being abused or feeling injustice. You seem to be of the childish notion that if others do wrong, then it's ok to do it yourself. This is false.

If the society ignores Islam while oppressing women, then why the hell should women accept the society and ignore their oppression; An Islamic sin?

They shouldn't but you're talking about domestic abuse, not forced marriage. two completely unanalous scenarios

In fact I'm sorry to say this but your debate as of now is Scattered and all over the place. You're Committing a RED HERRING Fallacy and this in no way supports your original debate.

You might be able to fool others by using these tactics; but I'm sorry this approach won't work on me. With me You need to make sure the logical basis for your arguments are consistent.

Nor is that the reason for these two whose video I posted! They had fled their home and when they came back, without asking whether they got married or not, they were accused of 'Zinah' and stoned to death. This is the point you have been ignoring throughout this thread. Instead of calling others 'Ferangian' or 'Westernised' or praise your own illogical arguments while ridiculing others', why don't you think of an Islamic solution for this issue? Islam requires witnesses for Zinah, which they didn't have in their case! And how would they? Did someone see them commit Zinah before they fled?

Islam doesn't necessarily only require witnesses, forensic data can also be used to ratify a conviction. BUt Your Original debate seemed that you're against penalty for adultererers, NOt the Situation. In the situation itself there may have been foul play indeed. If that is your contention Then we agree. But this is not your original argument. Originally you were astonished by the use of such means to penalize adultery; not that these methods were applied wrongfully.

Remember those are two different arguments. However, I still understand in the societal case that such behaviors have to be dealt with a heavy hand in Pashtunwali to ensure social equilibrium.

If yes how did they manage to flee afterwards with their belongings and without being punished straight-away? If they committed Zinah after they had fled then who witnessed their 'sin' while they were out of sight? If they (tribal elders and their parents) had just 'assumed' the couple had committed Zinah because they were away for a while then still their assumption is invalid because every accusation without any witness/evidence is, per Islam, invalid.

I don't know those details, I'm not debating this issue in the first place.

Scimitar, if you want women back home to be treated like animals then just say so. Why do you insult their circumstances by calling them romantic brainwashed fanatics? Public cinemas in villages of Laghman, Kunar, Faryab, Pashtun-Kot and etcetera don't even exist; And these incidents mostly happen in villages. How more stooped can you get with your so-called logical arguments just to prove Pukhtunwali right?

No that is just your Attempt at what's called Emotional Black Mail or Guilt Tripping. You're mixing up different cases , conditions and scenarios and arguing them as if they were one or that one validates the other; in the world of Logic it doesn't work that way. And let's not bull****, You can find Electronic Stores in Remote Villages of Qunduz. They're not as isolated as you make it seem.

And why doesn't it make true? I am still not able to find one solid point to why you think forced marriages are more acceptable than adultery? Give me one justified clarification for forced marriages (taking Islam into account) as to why forced marriages are more acceptable than adultery?

Because forced marriages involve marriage and thus have a structural familial connection, adultery is absent of this. That's by definition of adultery. That definition can't apply with forced marriages.

and taking Islam into account, without an Islamic State, Meta-Shari'ah comes into effect. This is like "emergency" Shari'ah, that is applied by default when the normal checks and balances of Islamic Law are not established in society by an Islamic State.

In normal words, happiness (according to you) is just an illusion of mind? Then tell me, why was Mohammad Salalahu Alaihe Wasalam's marriage considered a 'happy' marriage? Why does Islam say when marrying your children off take into consideration their 'happiness'? Now is Islam promoting 'Farangi' illusions as well?

No, True Happiness is derived by our relationship with nature because that is how we evolved. That mechanism and sensibility has been distorted due to whatever conditions hence the Sensation because deviated from it's function.

When Islam says "happiness" it's taking about appropriate to their faculties. Not "sensations" alone. That's why in the Qur'an it says

"allati fatara al-nasa"

But there is no proof that they committed adultery either? That's the accusation they got upon them for fleeing their village? Now tell me, what is your stand now?

Well if that was your contention you should have said that earlier.

Even Russians killed Afghans for a purpose, even Americans are killing Afghans for a purpose, even Mujahideen were killing Afghans for a purpose, even the Taliban are killing Afghans for a purpose; Does that mean it's a valid one? Just because it's done out of a 'purpose'?

No; but it that also doesn't mean adultery is valid either. The purpose for forced marriages is valid though under the faculties of life itself.

Then why isn't the correct thing happening? And why are you still supporting this law; Pukhtunwali? You are very rapid in calling Western society immoral where it clashes with Islam, but at the same time shy away by calling Pukhtunwali immoral even though many of it's aspects clash with Islam? Why the double-standard? Or am I being 'white-washed' again?

Because there is no standard Islamic Law and State to regulate how societ functions.

I don't support Pashtunwali I UNDERSTAND it and Understand why it's valid in this case.

There's no double standard. Just a deeper more nuanced understanding.

Parents right of what? Ruining their children's lives? Forcing them into a marriage?; An Islamic sin? Even they (the children) could argue that per Pukhtunwali they tarnished their families' honour but Islamic seen saved their parent's from committing a sin. How are you going to oppose that one?

Parents right of maintaining the equilibrium of their environment.

All your other contentions I already explained. This is what exists by necessity of the conditions in their lives.

And this is what I am asking you; Why? In Islam with capital letters it's said that adultery is a sin because it disturbs a society while forced marriage is a sin because a forced marriage is never considered valid in Islam to begin with. Islam has given full right to couples to get out of a forced marriage, so per Islam this couple hasn't even committed a sin; Because they wanted to prevent forced marriages.

But forced marriage becomes a sin only when there are appropriate checks and balances where it's no longer NECESSARY, key word here. Necessary.

Aha, forced marriages are necessary looking at a country's environment; That's why without any exception it's considered a sin? Mate, who do you think you are kidding? I will tell you why forced marriages are more appealing to you; Because it has been going on for centuries and maybe thousands of years, you are so used to the idea of forced marriage that it seems necessary to you. Same-wise, adultery has been going on in West for quiet a while now which is why people are so used to it, that's why it seems a necessary practise for them (those who practise it). And now per Islam; Both are a sin, both are punishable and both are considered immoral. A Islamic fact, deal with it.

Actually there are exceptions "Mate"; lack of Islamic State is a valid exception.

I'lll continue later, must go now.

[SroZaro Aslaha]

SroSro Aslasha

that's not the standard interpretation of Pashtunwali that is normative for Pashtuns. Also note I'm not advocating Pashtunwali.

More concrete references do not imply what you have in fact your description of nanawatey is follows;

http://www.khyber.org/culture/pashtunwali.shtml


[B]</H2>

I never implied that nanawateh can be performed in such cases as infidelity. Of course that is out of the question. How can a man beg for forgiveness for having a secret affair with someone from another family? That's obvious. My examples and explanations were to prove that Pukhtoonwali has certain rules that apply when a person is accused of something - usually in the same sense as a high court. It's not fully barbaric like you made it out to be with the sword slashing post. Not only that, but the penalty in ancient times weren't always carried out by murdering the accused. Pukhtoonwali, since it's very attached to Islamic regulations, have many times [especially when there has been little proof of immoral act - but simply an assumption] punished the accused according to Islamic laws instead. It wasn't until that good-for-nothing Rabbani, during the Taleban rule in the 90's that people suddenly turned radical. Radical to the point where they did not even hold a 'loya jirga' in cases such as these but acted on simple impulses.

I believe Pukhtoonwali has values that many other cultures could learn from, but it also has some of the worst regulations that definitely needs a change. I'd hate it to become too loose like the west, but there are many things in our Pukhtoonwali that are not needed any longer because education can be a better solution. That is what we essentially lack - and the main reason for tragedies such as these.

---

[khushal]

I must apologize for being too rash over stating their actual reasons for their escape. I do not know the full story and the details of this case so I can’t deny nor defend their actions. I also apologize if I may have come forth as someone who's against Pukhtoonwali - don't get me wrong. Pukhtoonwali has many good sides to it which I'll come back to later in my post. My main care is for the verdict of the death penalty the citizens agreed upon like in the old days. I know it’s difficult to examine whether the couple did have sexual intercourse while they were together or not. But it’s not impossible to find out. There are ways to summon a female doctor for further examination. This was not done here, which clearly shows that the parents did not care much for seeking the truth and bringing forth the core of the problem to society. Due to fear of being an outcast in the society they responded rashly and threw in the towel at the expense of the ‘culprits’.

From what I understand is that In pashtunwali, the crime is the man taking a woman with no relations away from her home without permission from her guardians. It does not matter if they had sex or not. The man is showing disrespect by displaying that he has the power and courage to take away their namus(women) without fear of penalty. He has brought injury to the family's namus and ghyrat.
It seems that the two families talked about how to resolve this and they decided to give the perpetrators this punishment or decided that some assembly decide the fate of the two, I don't know that much details. But most disputes are handled by people that have much knowledge of pashtunwali. It is not handled by amateurs.

Let me tell you a story about one case that I know of. This same thing happened where a woman Zahra was arranged to marry a man named Gull, but she had feelings for another man named Adil and Adil had feeling for her. They made plans to run away together. Gull started to threaten the family of Adil and somehow the two returned. The two families sat together with the elders and came to some sort of an agreement where Adil family gave money and some prime real estate in the village to Gull. Adil and Zahro were married. Gull married another woman. People kept calling Gull baighyrat, bainamus, he lost all respect. Gull had five sons, his sons were also called the sons of a baighyrat, sons of bainamus. Gull eldest son one day got sick of the disrespect and got up and shot Adil killing him. Adil son got up and killed Gull. Tre zamon from both sides got involved and today 30 people are now dead including all of Gull's sons, Adil sons and tre zamon from both families have also died spanning three generations. There were many attempts to bring peace in the two families, there were agreements but one party or the other kept violating the agreements.

Asylum– if a person from anywhere asks an Afghan for asylum and he’s given that – then the Afghan will have to refuge and protect the asylum seeker as long as he’s in his territory. Example: during the 2nd World war the Russian authorities demanded the hand-over of German diplomats, and the Afghan government held a general national assembly where they discussed the matter and then decided that as long as those diplomats were guests in Afghan territory, they would not be handed-over. The German diplomats were later safely delivered back to their own country. Another example is when Iran’s King Nader Shah Afshar attacked Afghanistan and later invaded India. On his way back, while on Afghan territory, he was assassinated by his own soldiers, and they attempted to loot his treasure. When the Afghan people heard what happened, they immediately gave protection to King Nader Shahs whole family, treasure and belongings and returned them safely to Teheran despite him being an invader in Afghanistan. This is called ‘’Panah’’. These are principles with good intention, but can sometimes (although rarely) be misused – such as the case with Bin Laden.
.

I am no fan of bin laden but I do believe that the whole Bin laden situation could have been handled peacefully but it was the US who was so adamant in invading and was unresponsive to Taliban pleas for a peaceful solution.

Blood recompense – This is another way to abolish a dispute between two families. The family at fault will negotiate by offering to give away their daughter (a virgin) off for marriage. This is not considered a ‘gift package’ [as some westerners may see it since it appears that way for those who are not familiar with the families’ history and our culture]. It is specifically meant to make amends with the family that’s been offended.

The negative outcomes of Blood Recompense are:

• That the girl may be too young to decide for herself, or she may not want to be married off – which by definition violates the Islamic law.

• If she’s an adult and accepts the marriage, it is done in the act of avoiding the murder of her father or brother in the future [Blood feud]. So she’s paying for something she never did.

• Once married off - her bondage with her previous family can be completely cut off if her husband wants it that way - and her parents can’t do anything about it. Her new family [especially the women – don’t hate me ladies, but this is true] usually treat her horrendously, she can get beaten, be forced to do inhumanely hard labour, and be openly distinguished in the family by letting her eat leftover or eat alone, sleep alone or in a barn outside ++etcetera. The punishments can exceed to countless volumes of tales. More often than not the girl tries to commit suicide – if she fails to do that – she’ll try to escape for sanctuary in her previous home which leads to nothing more than her being returned back to her husband by her father or brother. When she gets back – her life is clinging on a thin thread. And the atrocities continue.

• If the girl commits suicide, or the family does not have a daughter – a blood revenge feud is almost inevitable – and innocent young sons and brothers will have to pay the price.

The positive outcome is that it brings peace among the two families and there is a huge avoidance of innocent bloodshed.

I believe the intention of this was that the feuding families actually becoming related by blood so the feud and hate can disappear and love between the two parties can flourish. The idea is that you can not hate your relative.

YouTube - &#x202a;The Pashtunwali , Pakhtunwali&#x202c;&rlm;

Listen to 1:12 where the man clearly says that" che ta ghyrat habara rashe bya sari(man) sar na thair ta." When it comes to ghyrat, then one will sacrifice his life for it.

[khushal]

Do you like to follow Pukhtunwali or Islam? Is Pukhtunwali your preferred way or Islam? And why can't you do anything about it? Because Pukhtunwali doesn't allow you to, or because Islam doesn't allow you to?

Islam is of course the preferred way, I have been saying that the whole time. I do believe that if there was Shariah, these two lives would have been saved. But my point is that the law of the land is Pashtunwali and they have to abide by it or be punished by it. When I go to my village, I will not try to plan an elopement with any woman and have her come to the west with me. I wont not because I fear for my life, I wont because I fear for my cousins and uncles lives. I know that a blood feud would start because of my selfishness.

Yes, I know in Islam a married man/woman who commits 'Zinah' is stoned to death and unmarried couples are to receive 100 lashes. In both cases, witnesses are needed, which didn't happen here.

This crime was not handled Islamicaly which would have been ideal, it was handled according to the laws of pashtunwali. In pashtunwali, the crime was not the sex, it was the man taking a namus that did not belong to him.

No, you called something which is even against Islam (stoning a couple who weren't married to someone else) 'peacefully corrected' and those who spoke out against it are being called 'Western thinkers'. Even in Islamic perspective this punishment was wrong, you don't need a Westerner to tell you why that is.

Yes peacefully corrected in according to the laws of pashtunwali but again this was not done in accordance with islam which would have been ideal but sharia does not exist in this area.

Khushal'a, what crime? By eloping? What about the crime their parents were going to commit by forcing them into another marriage? If Islam allows individuals to rise against forced marriages then what the hell is Pukhtunwali? So what is their crime? Ditching Islam? Or ditching Pukhtunwali?

We are going in circles here. I explained it already, reread the post.

Sure. Enquire about Hira Mandi, rising male prostitution in Pakistan, abduction of little boys in Afghanistan, women of Kabul who in broad daylight are brought to foreign bases in Jeeps every week; Just a few to name. It's not that these people are impossible to find, it's just that no one will focus 'such petty matters'.

Kabuli's dont practice pashtunwali. But I can tell you that the Talibans number one recruitment is that they tell the youngsters that it is their obligation to protect their namus).

Meet Pukhtoons in my college, even if you called them 'idiot' they will break your jaws. Same-wise, use the term to a Panjsheri in Kabul, you think he is just going to giggle at you because he hasn't followed Pukhtunwali?

Your changing goal posts. The pashtun or any other person is not obligated to hit in that society, actually he will be punished by the law if he does. But in pashtun society it is an obligation and there are consequences if he does not act. Also It is the panjsheri and kabuli women that are being driven to NATO bases and what are the panjsheris doing about it but thts besides the point of the argument.

LOL, so if there was no Pukhtunwali you could have saved your life by calling a random man 'gay'? If you call any Afghan with the same term he will break your neck and I am very sure not every Afghan follows Pukhtunwali.

Changing goal posts again.

Even before Islam people were manipulated to follow many other norms and values, did that discourage Muslims to spread Islam? Some of the members made very good points here. Empires, oppressors, looters, etcetera didn't fall on their own, it took us (those living under it) to fight and eliminate the oppression. And like Scimitar, you also justify Pukhtunwali by calling it 'a norm of society' while don't delay for even a second when calling Western society immoral. Just because people are 'manipulated' to live in a society like Pukhtunwali doesn't mean it's the right thing to live under.

Their are negative aspects in pashtunwali that contradicts with Islam that I do condemn. But there are also positive aspects in pashtunwali such as defending ones dignity to the last breath. It is because of this aspect that the Pashtuns are the heart of muslims. It is the pashtuns that have died and sacrificed harder and longer than any other people and it is because of the positive aspects of pashtunwali.

That's no pressure, mate. I personally find this 'be up-to-date with fashion hard-core' way too silly and meaningless, but that's the choice people make. No one was putting guns of heads of those women in Kabul either to wear skirts, but they did. Why? Because it was their choice.

It was actually becoming a norm for Kabulis to wear mini skirts. It was tolerated. They were going against the norm of the society that was surrounding kabul and we all now how that ended.

With under-aged girls I assume you mean under sixteen year old's (under-aged per British law) and a vast majority of under-aged girls I have seen don't really wear sexually provocative to be honest. But you have exceptions everywhere; Here you got under-aged girls totally blinded by fashion by choice, back home you got under-aged girls totally pushed into a marriage by force. To you under-aged girls way too much into fashion may be immoral, to someone else under-aged girls forced into a marriage may be immoral; But what's is immoral in Islam?

What I just said and you just said is immoral in Islam. But these girls are manipulated by the society they live in because society has not only tolerated but encouraged this fashion.

You can't simply compare adjustment of way of dressing with adjustment of force. Even Islam recommends women to be as covered as possible, despite of the society you live. But Islam never recommended to adjust to forced marriages; Despite of the society you live in.

I never said forced marriage is encouraged by Islam.

I personally wouldn't like to say much about homosexuality because I am still unsure whether it's a born case with people, or a developed one? If they are born with it and it's considered a disease then we should fight against it, not kill it. And if considered normal then I have to think about Islam's stand on it. Here in West in many places homosexuality might be very well accepted but by far not as much practised, there on the other hand you got Afghanistan where homosexuality is looked down upon but yet highly practised. Now whom to blame?; People who practice it? Or society which allows it?

Homosexuality is immoral no matter where it is practiced.

Even acceptance of Islam seemed impossible when people had different religions, now it's the most normal thing ever. Even after 9/11 it seemed impossible to practise Islam in West, in return it became the fastest growing religion in West. Nothing is impossible mate. If you sincerely wish to make a change, nothing is impossible. Revenge in Pukhtoon lands is very common and about the slightest things. These things shouldn't be accepted because it seems impossible; They should be fought against and replaced with rules of Islam. You can't protect it in name of society or Pukhtunwali, because in name of Islam this is exactly what you think the Western society is; Immoral. If there is not excuse for other culture which clash with Islam, then why should there be any excuse for Pukhtunwali's clash with Islam?

When did I say that pashtunwali should trump over Islamic values. I have been saying the opposite the whole time.

Pukhtunwali didn't destroy their (foreigners') lands, they (foreigners) destroyed ours. Pukhtoons might have given them a tough time, they nonetheless (compared to us) lost nothing my friend.

Pashtunwali does not encourage aggression or destruction of other societies but it does encourage defence very strongly and it has served that purpose.

Pukhtoons weren't the only 'warriors'; Many non-Pukhtoons lost their lives too and not because of Pukhtunwali, but for the sake of freedom. Jihad is a rule of Islam, not Pukhtunwali. Did we not have Pukhtunwali, we would have Islam to fight for. Once again, that's not an excuse.

there were non Pushtuns that fought but the vast majority that fought were pashtuns and currently the vast majority of fighters are Pashtuns. The pashtuns are fighting for Islam but it is pashtunwali that encourages the Pashtuns to.