Iranian Fashion Fatwa

[path]

One can never rest when fighting the influences of satan

New and special costumes are needed to go with the historic vocations of the new Iran. These fashion designs reject undesirable and corrupting Western styles. These fashion proposals are in strict harmony with Iranian religious practice.

Adulterers are generally stoned to death by assembled onlookers in keeping with Islamic teachings. Therefore, a pleated dress shirt should be made for stoning adulterers, preferably in white silk to attest to the stone-throwers' purity. The stone-throwers should have a free throwing arm, so both right and left sleeves should be amply (mutton-shaped) proportioned from shoulder to forearm. Stoning adulterers is a religious rite and participants should dress as for a holy day.

For the lesser punishment of whipping, as prescribed for violators of Islamic law, a different colored shirt -- red -- should be designed for the whipper and witnesses. An experienced whipper will start guilty blood flowing and even spurting from the criminal. This would discolor a white shirt and make it perhaps unsuitable for normal wear. A red shirt would eliminate that problem.
Different costumes are needed for those who fulfill the religious authorities' orders to inflict pain on sinners. (We repudiate designation of these devout Muslims as "torturers" when, as is well known, the punishment is a form of penance to assure the victim a place in paradise.) Pain inflicters need a sleeveless shirt to keep the swinging arm free from the shoulder down.

Wonder if Benneton can break into this market?

Special costumes are needed for the dedicated hangmen, one for those who prepare male sinners for hanging and another for those who prepare the hanging of women, especially young female law violators. It is not morally proper or civilized that the hangman who oversaw the execution of a 16-year-old girl sinner last week should wear the same costume as a hangman who supervises the ultimate fate of a hardened criminal.

That must be some consolation for a doomed 16 year old girl

The 16-year-old girl, Ateqeh Sahaleh, was publicly hanged in the city center on Sunday, Aug. 15, in the town of Neka. The sentence was issued by the head of Neka's Justice Department and subsequently upheld by the mullahs' Supreme Court.
At her trial, the teenager had no lawyer, and her family's efforts to recruit a lawyer were to no avail.
Ateqeh personally defended herself. She told the religious judge, Haji Rezaii, he should punish the main perpetrators of moral corruption, not the victims. After her execution, Judge Rezai said he had her killed for her "sharp tongue."
Above all, there must be an extraordinary costume for Muslim men and women who make the ultimate sacrifice as jihadists (the infidel description of "suicide bombers" should be repudiated). The holy martyrs....etc

Article

enjoy

 

[Leo Volont]

One can never rest when fighting the influences of satan



Wonder if Benneton can break into this market?



That must be some consolation for a doomed 16 year old girl



Article

enjoy

We can see by the ubiquitous moral corruption in Western Society today that if there is generally an absence of fear of negative repurccussions, people will do, say, and wear anything. We KNOW that people have no shame. If people have no shame, then we must lean on what we do know they have plenty of, and that is FEAR.

We can look back not long ago at the Victorian Period and its morality. I was not long ago reading Henry Fielding's "Tom Jones" (actually pre-Victorian) and in one of his less amusing chapters lays out the foundation of their Moral System -- it was that those who transgressed would be totally and completely ostracized from Socieity -- no respectable person would have any respectable dealings with any transgressor. People were quite afraid to take on such a system and would rather follow its rules then be caught breaking them -- even silly girls. Nowadays, there is no stopping silly girls from anything -- a bunch of fly-blown single and pregnant aids traps. Ostracizing them would set the right example for others, but the exiled girls only go off to form a reprehensible sub-community of their own, which sets up a commerce in prostitution. The Muslim Ideal of cutting off an occasional silly head to keep the vast majority in line is probably the better idea.

 

[path]

We can see by the ubiquitous moral corruption in Western Society today that if there is generally an absence of fear of negative repurccussions, people will do, say, and wear anything. We KNOW that people have no shame. If people have no shame, then we must lean on what we do know they have plenty of, and that is FEAR.
Blah blah blah, slather, foam, drool

Here read about the 16 year old girl who was executed and here lover who got off with 100 lashes you should enjoy it it is the type of story that warms your black heart Leo

If I told you what I think of you and your twisted version of the perfect society I would get banned so I will bite my tongue in the face of your ignorance. Leo why don't you check and see which country has the highest incidence of opiate based drug addiction in the world. Guess what it is Iran despite things like this

sentenced a 16-year-old boy to death

and Three juveniles sentenced to death

You should find this especially comforting Tehran, Sep. 3 - A man by the name of Mohammad N. was hanged in public in the city of Arak, (central Iran) on Sunday, August 29.

I believe there were in all 292 executions this year in Iran and yet they still have the highest rate of opiate addiction in the world Guess what Hollands drug addiction rates actually fell for the second year running DESPITE the fact that they have the most relaxed drug laws in the world

 

[Leo Volont]

Dear Path,

Would you murder a boy for not protecting HIS virtue? What for? Is there anything to protect? Not really. But a unchaste girl can become pregnant and impose an ill-bred burden on the rest of society.

So a boy imposes no threat upon the limited resources of his society. But a girl can bring forth a useless and unwanted individual who will nevertheless insist on having its bellyfull of food for a lifetime, and grow to be probably no better than its father and with no more foresight than its mother.

It is the young silly girls which need to be impressed with the seriousness of their crimes.

Besides, a 100 lashes will permanently scare and disfigure a boy, which won't significantly detract from his social value, which comes from his ability to labor or fight in the Army. But what would 100 lashes do to a girl. It would entirely ruin her. Damaged goods! Might as well kill her as do that to her!

 

[Bells]

Where does one even begin...

We can see by the ubiquitous moral corruption in Western Society today that if there is generally an absence of fear of negative repurccussions, people will do, say, and wear anything.

Yes Leo, people do say and wear anything. Even you. Hell, just read your posts in this forum and it becomes blatantly apparent that some people will just about say anything. For example:

Ostracizing them would set the right example for others, but the exiled girls only go off to form a reprehensible sub-community of their own, which sets up a commerce in prostitution.

We can look back not long ago at the Victorian Period and its morality.

Leo, dear dear Leo, the Victorian period was one that was rife with sexual indiscretions and immorality. It was a time where women had no rights. Men could do as they wished, and if they were wealthy, they did not need to fear punishment because they could literally buy their way out of it. Religion dominated the lives and homes of many of the wealthy, and the people with the money could dominate the religion. And that is the society and time that you deem to be steeped in morality? Good grief! Or is this your way of saying that you liked looking at pictures of women in corsets tied so tightly that their bosoms looked as though they were popping out?

I was not long ago reading Henry Fielding's "Tom Jones" (actually pre-Victorian) and in one of his less amusing chapters lays out the foundation of their Moral System -- it was that those who transgressed would be totally and completely ostracized from Socieity -- no respectable person would have any respectable dealings with any transgressor.

Only if they were too stupid to use their wealth to buy their way out of it. Money spoke volumes in that time Leo. You're saying that the men who went to the 'clubs' to have some fun with prostitutes, gamble and drink themselves to oblivion was a time of morality? Things were done behind closed doors Leo. The Clubs were closed to all non-members and members could get away with murder, literally. Your readings of Victorian romance novels do not portray society. Well they did, but you seem to prefer to ignore all the juicy little chapters. In Victorian times, those who were ostracised were those who did not have the money to hide their indiscretions. If you lost your money, you were ostracised. If a man had an affair, it was normal. Hell, so many wealthy men kept mistresses in that time and this was accepted. Men who did so and/or who beat their wives were not punished by society or the law. Morality indeed...

People were quite afraid to take on such a system and would rather follow its rules then be caught breaking them -- even silly girls. Nowadays, there is no stopping silly girls from anything -- a bunch of fly-blown single and pregnant aids traps. Ostracizing them would set the right example for others, but the exiled girls only go off to form a reprehensible sub-community of their own, which sets up a commerce in prostitution.

Heh.. here we go with the "silly girls" again. No mention of the silly boys who were also guilty of the crimes you accuse the "silly girls" of committing. So you dislike the fact that women have rights today? Why is that Leo? Honestly, as a man with a daughter, your disrespect of women astounds me. You continuously praise one woman who was in fact a single mother, yet you view other women as "silly girls"? Should girls today remain locked in a dungeon, never to be seen or heard? You advocate exiling women like we did with lepers so long ago when our thoughts and beliefs were, to say the least, ignorant, sub-human and very unchristian like? Thankfully, most educated individuals have managed to evolve from those dark ages.

And Leo, in case you weren't aware, prostitution has been around since the beginning of time. It's not a reprehensible sub-community. You don't accuse the married men who visit prostitutes any mention at all. You seem to blame women for all, when men are also to blame. Jesus didn't seem to think that prostitutes formed part of a 'reprehensible sub-community' when he helped Mary Magdalane. And you call yourself a Christian? Maybe it's time you followed the teachings of the son of the woman you value so much. He seemed to have more knowledge of a woman's rights than you do. And he supposedly existed thousands of years ago... pre-victorian.

The Muslim Ideal of cutting off an occasional silly head to keep the vast majority in line is probably the better idea.

Let me guess... you're one of those individuals who stands outside jails at times of execution clapping as they push the button aren't you?

 

[path]

Dear Path,

Would you murder a boy for not protecting HIS virtue? What for? Is there anything to protect? Not really. But a unchaste girl can become pregnant and impose an ill-bred burden on the rest of society.

A partner in crime who knows full well the burden he may be causing for society if I was as black as you then you are damn right I would. Isn't it you Leo who drones on and on about collective responsibility? About the evils of freedom?

So a boy imposes no threat upon the limited resources of his society. But a girl can bring forth a useless and unwanted individual who will nevertheless insist on having its bellyfull of food for a lifetime, and grow to be probably no better than its father and with no more foresight than its mother.

Does that girl NEED a boy to complete this dastardly act? Does that boy bear no responsibility for his actions?

It is the young silly girls which need to be impressed with the seriousness of their crimes.

Misogyny plain and simple

Besides, a 100 lashes will permanently scare and disfigure a boy, which won't significantly detract from his social value, which comes from his ability to labor or fight in the Army. But what would 100 lashes do to a girl. It would entirely ruin her. Damaged goods! Might as well kill her as do that to her!

You are beyond description, you are a social ill Leo.

 

[I Am F_AQ2]

I am truly appalled by your posts Leo! I truly hope that you live in a country that supports those virtues that you seem to uphold because you sure do not belong here. A PERSON is liable for their actions, man or woman and both are equally required to bear children. Men are even more to blame in prostitution since the women are making a living while the men are usually destroying whatever relationship they have with their family at home. Furthermore, the punishment must fit the crime and you seem like you simply want to kill everyone that jaywalks. Death because of adultery, that’s insane. Nor does “the Muslim ideal” does not seem to work either. Those countries that impose such practices always seem to be in turmoil and defiantly not the safest place to live. Silly boy Leo.

 

[Leo Volont]

dear Leo, the Victorian period was one that was rife with sexual indiscretions and immorality.

Rife? No. It was exceptional.

But you did have classes. The Middle Class was known for its adherence to Morality -- thus the generalization which we are all familiar with: "Middle Class Morality". Some of the Aristocracy could be quite wicked, but at least kept itself discreet most of the time. But the lower class was thought to be entirely unregenerate -- that is almost what defined them -- their wickedness and illegitimacy.

Now, I suppose it is your argument that they were no better than we are.

Honestly?

I have studied the History of the last several hundred years and read the literature. And I'm convinced that they adhered to a Moral Code that is now almost entirely absent. Read the books. You'll see.

Everyone talks about America being Middle Class. Actually, it has become almost entirely Lower Class. Despite income distribution, as far as Morality goes, THERE IS NO LONGER ANY MIDDLE CLASS MORALITY. Simply look at your own tolerance for illegitimacy and every other form of dishonor. That is trade mark lower class. It is Barbarism.

Law, Rule, Code, Duty -- these things are substantial and real to a Moral Class.

You think that the Victorians were bad, but what you are pointing out are their Scandals. It means something, doesn't it, that they were ashamed enough of such behavior that it WAS scandalous. Today, an actual Priest has to bugger a baby before anybody begins to think in terms of scandal. But in Victorian England, and uncaparoned date would be enough to scandalize a community and ruin a Reputation for life. Today people don't have 'reputations'. They have no Morality.

Read a few books. Besides learning something, you will find that the style of writing was actually a lot better then.

 

[Leo Volont]

A partner in crime who knows full well the burden he may be causing for society if I was as black as you then you are damn right I would. Isn't it you Leo who drones on and on about collective responsibility? About the evils of freedom?

What? Are you screaming for blood? The 100 lashes are not enough and you want the boys put to death?

Again, what purpose would that serve?

100 Lashes will be plenty of example for the rest of the lads, and he will go on to be a good enough laborer or soldier. Why do you think it necessary to murder him? Because we would kill a girl for the same thing? So you would commit murder to be 'fair'. That is a wild fairness, no?

Apparently Tradition had tried sever punishment on Females but found that it culminated in too many problems. A boy can move on in life. But a disfigured girl who had been silly to begin with -- there would be no place for such a thing. We can say that on the day she committed her indiscretion she effectively committed suicide. They know the Rules. They bring their fates upon themselves.

 

[path]

I have read some of the historical knowledge you have Leo and I am not impressed. Tell me again how the christian warrior class stopped the mongols

 

[Leo Volont]

I am truly appalled by your posts Leo! I truly hope that you live in a country that supports those virtues that you seem to uphold because you sure do not belong here.

Are you honestly sure you prefer no morals to a Society that has morals.

You do understand that without Moral Guidelines that you can expect to be enslaved, abused, murdered and your properties pillaged. You can expect your wife and daughters to be raped or debauched. You can expect never to be treated fairly. No one will ever be good for their word. No contract can be trusted. Everyone will lie to you and cheat you. Is that REALLY what you want?

Or we could have a moral Society. Yes, people who break the Rules would be punished, but ISN'T THAT what we want?

 

[path]

What? Are you screaming for blood? The 100 lashes are not enough and you want the boys put to death?

Again, what purpose would that serve?

100 Lashes will be plenty of example for the rest of the lads, and he will go on to be a good enough laborer or soldier. Why do you think it necessary to murder him? Because we would kill a girl for the same thing? So you would commit murder to be 'fair'. That is a wild fairness, no?

Apparently Tradition had tried sever punishment on Females but found that it culminated in too many problems. A boy can move on in life. But a disfigured girl who had been silly to begin with -- there would be no place for such a thing. We can say that on the day she committed her indiscretion she effectively committed suicide. They know the Rules. They bring their fates upon themselves.

Collective responsibility Leo if you are first going to go as far as murdering the girl as a warning to society then you should murder the boy as well to make that warning stronger. Look at i like this you have a boy pressuring a girl for sex or easily giving in to her desire for sex what will be more likely to stop HIM the thought that he will be killed if he does or that he will be whipped if he does? If the boy refuses to participate then the girl CANNOT perform the act.

 

[Leo Volont]

I have read some of the historical knowledge you have Leo and I am not impressed. Tell me again how the christian warrior class stopped the mongols

What happened to Persia?

What happened to Christendom?

One became the basis of a huge Mountain of Skulls.

The other built Notre Dame in gratitude for the Catholic Victory.

 

[path]

What happened to Persia?

What happened to Christendom?

One became the basis of a huge Mountain of Skulls.

The other built Notre Dame in gratitude for the Catholic Victory.

Get yourself some books Leo, one I can recommend which I finished not too long ago is "The Devils Horsemen".
The ONLY defeat the Mongols suffered in the mid 13th century was at the hands of the Mameluk egyptians and even then it took 80,000 of them to just narrowly defeat 25,000 mongols.

 

[Bells]

Rife? No. It was exceptional.

But you did have classes. The Middle Class was known for its adherence to Morality -- thus the generalization which we are all familiar with: "Middle Class Morality". Some of the Aristocracy could be quite wicked, but at least kept itself discreet most of the time. But the lower class was thought to be entirely unregenerate -- that is almost what defined them -- their wickedness and illegitimacy.

And we still have classes Leo. The middle class was NEVER known for its adherence to morality. They merely knew how to hide it better. They had the money to hide it. And their 'wickedness'? Dear Leo, you do realise that the moral middle class made the lower class what they were, don't you? After all, it was the moral middle and upper class who would visit the prostitutes because they were the ones who had the money to pay for it.

Now, I suppose it is your argument that they were no better than we are.

Honestly?

I have studied the History of the last several hundred years and read the literature. And I'm convinced that they adhered to a Moral Code that is now almost entirely absent. Read the books. You'll see.

No Leo, they were no better than we are. They were in fact worse. And I too have studied history and the literature and frankly I cannot see what you're basing your argument on. The Victorians were vicious and totally lacking in morals. These were the times where women had no rights and where people were actually seen to be property. That alone should prove that there was a complete lack of moral code. One would think that the morals we have developed today were in response to the total lack of immorality of that time. At least today slavery is seen with abhorrance and women are given some rights.

Everyone talks about America being Middle Class. Actually, it has become almost entirely Lower Class. Despite income distribution, as far as Morality goes, THERE IS NO LONGER ANY MIDDLE CLASS MORALITY. Simply look at your own tolerance for illegitimacy and every other form of dishonor. That is trade mark lower class. It is Barbarism.

Leo, middle class morality shows to us in its literature, that illegitimacy was a common thing. You're calling a time where men acquired women like property a time of morality? If a woman could not add to the man's wealth, then she remained a spinster. The illegitimate children born of the moral middle class were either packed off to distant lands or thrown out on the streets. That is barbarism Leo. But then I guess that your morals and the rest of humanity's morals just don't match up now do they?

Law, Rule, Code, Duty -- these things are substantial and real to a Moral Class.

HEH! You're joking right? Law, rule, code and duty were there not only to keep maintain control on the lower class but also to allow the middle class to find a way out of their immorality. The moral class knew better than anyone how to get out of the law and duty.

You think that the Victorians were bad, but what you are pointing out are their Scandals. It means something, doesn't it, that they were ashamed enough of such behavior that it WAS scandalous.

The victorians were bad. And it was scandalous not because of the immorality of it all, but because any hint of scandal would result in their not being invited to a particular ball or party and their wealth could actually end up being reduced from a loss of business contacts. The moral class Leo, were only concerned with their place in the despicable society in which they resided and with their wealth. You're calling a time when men and women judged each other not by their values and personal beliefs but on how much money they had a moral time? I think it is your definition of morals that we should be examining Leo.

Today, an actual Priest has to bugger a baby before anybody begins to think in terms of scandal. But in Victorian England, and uncaparoned date would be enough to scandalize a community and ruin a Reputation for life. Today people don't have 'reputations'. They have no Morality.

Back in Victorian England, a priest could 'bugger' a baby and not face a scandal. And you're comparing a woman walking unescorted with a man with a peadophile priest? And you're trying to lecture us about morals?

Read a few books. Besides learning something, you will find that the style of writing was actually a lot better then.

Ah yes... the literature. Where so much was left unsaid and all mentions of sex was left up to the imagination.

100 Lashes will be plenty of example for the rest of the lads, and he will go on to be a good enough laborer or soldier. Why do you think it necessary to murder him? Because we would kill a girl for the same thing? So you would commit murder to be 'fair'. That is a wild fairness, no?

Ah so it's murder if the boy is hung, but not murder if the same fate happens to the girl? So it's alright for the girl to be so severely punished to the point of murder for her supposed crime, but not for the boy... oh no.. he's innocent.. led astray by a luscious evil female... oh the morality...

Apparently Tradition had tried sever punishment on Females but found that it culminated in too many problems. A boy can move on in life. But a disfigured girl who had been silly to begin with -- there would be no place for such a thing. We can say that on the day she committed her indiscretion she effectively committed suicide. They know the Rules. They bring their fates upon themselves.

How repulsive. So the boy was not 'silly'? He was merely following his urges huh Leo? Of course the boy can move on in life. He had sex with a girl and she ended up dying for it and he only got 100 lashes for his so called crime. But you are the type of sick individual that would find that acceptable.

The boy also knew the rules Leo, so in effect, he brought it on the girl because he knew that the discovery of their indiscretion would result in her death. So that in my view makes him akin to a murderer.

You do understand that without Moral Guidelines that you can expect to be enslaved, abused, murdered and your properties pillaged. You can expect your wife and daughters to be raped or debauched. You can expect never to be treated fairly. No one will ever be good for their word. No contract can be trusted. Everyone will lie to you and cheat you. Is that REALLY what you want?

And these things happened with the middle class war mongers Leo. Such behaviour is part of what Victorian England was known for. Hell it was the upper and middle classes who owned slaves off-shore. We really should investigate your morality Leo, because you're proving time and time again that you are severely lacking when it comes to morality.

 

[James R]

he Muslim Ideal of cutting off an occasional silly head to keep the vast majority in line is probably the better idea.

You have a quite breathtaking capacity for imposing double standards, Leo. The fact that you never advocate harsh punishments or penalties for people of your own perceived social class, sex or position, whilst at the same time advocating the ultimate sanction for those who form the targets of your naive prejudices, really speaks volumes.

 

[Michael]

We can see by the ubiquitous moral corruption in Western Society today bla bla bla bla .

The West is more morally astute now than it has ever been. Who are you to tell us what is moral and amoral? That is a question only society can define. Not a person. And anyway, at least today Blacks aren’t sold between Arabs and Americans. At least women have the freedom to seek their own destiny.

Etcetera.

And for some reason your post seems to adequate the hanging of an innocent with a rational need for society to live in fear? Is that where you are going? Because that my friend is sick and thankfully we don’t live in a society where religion is formally tied to government.

The story of the 16 year old girl makes me sick.

I am wondering how long before the second revolution? Will the sanctions imposed on Iran in the coming years (oh it's going to happen) bring the people together or cause a new revolution or go the way of Iraq? And for the avg Westerner does it matter? Incidentally every Iranian I know is voting for Bush.

 

[I Am F_AQ2]

Originally posted by: Leo
You do understand that without Moral Guidelines that you can expect to be enslaved, abused, murdered and your properties pillaged. You can expect your wife and daughters to be raped or debauched. You can expect never to be treated fairly. No one will ever be good for their word. No contract can be trusted. Everyone will lie to you and cheat you. Is that REALLY what you want?

That is true and since I trust many people, I have not had my properties pillaged and have never even known a rape victim then I can honestly say that I live in a moral society. Yours on the other hand is a frightening place. You cannot honestly tell me that people are so damn immoral while a woman can walk down the street with 5 thousand dollars of jewelry on and a purse with credit cards and cash in it without worrying about being killed or robbed. Robberies happen but they are so few that people are not afraid or even worried.