This was a difficult subject to write about, so I chose the following approach:
First, you are a woman. You are accused and convicted of adultery.
Your hands are tied behind you. You are wrapped in a white sheet. You are buried up to your chest. Between the tightly packed earth and the cloth over your face, breathing is difficult. But your attention will soon be elsewhere.
You hear the jeers and bloodlust of the crowd. Whore. Death is too good for you, they say. You’re not sure, but you think you can just catch a few sobs, some screams in the din. Is it a cousin? An old friend? A grieving stranger? You are certain that those cries do not belong to your husband. You hope that they did not bring your children here to watch your murder.
Soon the rocks will begin to pummel your head, your face, your back and your breasts. You know that death will not come soon enough, because the size of the rocks is mandated by Iranian law: large enough to inflict pain, and small enough that no single stone can land the killing blow. Spots of red will soon stain the cloth, growing until it is soaked, and the woman that you were is gone, and all that remains is a mass of pulverized flesh and bone.
You pray to Allah for your children. You pray that death will come quickly. Then you spit through your dry mouth and the cloth at the crowd before the first stone strikes.
This is the fate that awaits Malak Ghorbany, convicted of adultery on June 28 in Northwestern Iran. In Iran, adultery is punishable by getting hanged, whipped or stoned to death. Most of the deaths I’ve read about are women accused of adultery (one girl, aged 16, was hanged in 2005) and men and boys accused of homosexual acts. Recently a vigil was held for the execution of two teenage gay lovers (reported on Andrew Sullivan’s blog. Warning: graphic link). Honestly, I don’t have much hope that we can prevent her execution. But we have to do something. At the very least, we have to get the word out and add our individual outrage as a testimony against the brutal violence of the Iranian state against women.
Here’s a few supporting links:
- Please sign the online petition.
- Read more about how adultery is punished in Iran (pdf).
- Take action (scroll down for suggestions).
- Watch a video of a stoning (warning: very graphic!).
If you do write about this on your blog, or if you find additional resources, please add the link(s) in the comments.
10 responses so far ↓
1 pilgrimgirl // Jul 20, 2006 at 8:51 am
My attempt at a reply to your thoughtful post:
http://pilgrimgirl.blogspot.com/2006/07/stones.html
2 Johnny // Jul 20, 2006 at 12:03 pm
I signed the petition b/c after seeing the video I could not help it. But I must admit that I could not resolve my nagging doubt that the UN does not really have the right to impose religious sanctions on the people of Iran. It has always been a tension between giving respect for diversity of other religious traditions and being critical of behaviors I see as wrong. I am not a moral relatitivist, but a pluralist. The one reason I signed it was because the UN would not use force to impose their will, other than that I would not have signed it.
3 PodMonkeys // Jul 20, 2006 at 1:27 pm
I noticed that the email address given on the site with the video is to Mohammad Khatami, who is no longer president of Iran.
Johnny, I had similar nagging thoughts about imposing our will upon another country’s religious beliefs, but if the petition is correct, then Iran does belong to the ICCPR and either needs to follow its rules or seperate. Of course with the way Iranian officials admit to selling weapons to the Hezbollah in private, while the government public denies all such sales, who can trust the Iranian government to honor anything?
While we’re at it, it’d be nice to stop all of the brutal deaths and torture to all people, including male criminals. I believe, if I heard correctly, that we (U.S.A.) are the last of the major industrialized nations still practicing corporal punishment. This puts us in the same group as Iran and several other nations that we deem as “bad guys” and anti-democratic.
4 Miko // Jul 20, 2006 at 6:47 pm
Re: Johnny’s and PodMonkey’s moral relativism/pluralism (I know neither are either, but this is in response to their qualms). I had occassion to ponder this recently: the “inalienable rights” of people and what happens when they conflict. Basically, the Constitution (ideally) guarantees rights to all people so long as they do not infringe another’s. I can practice my religion so long as your liberty or life are not endangered by it (hence why polygamy is not allowed), for example. I think that the same principle must come into play here: the freedom of Iranians (and other Sharia-Muslims, see the Canadian case study) to practice their religion freely is guaranteed so long as it does not infringe upon another’s rights. In this case, Ms. Ghorbany’s right to life. Since one person’s rights (the Iranians at large) compromise another’s (Ms. Ghorbany’s), we must step in and voice our outrage. When they do not, it is the right of all Iranians to practice their religion(s) without our input.
The United States (as an agent) believes that the rights of another, when that other has violated our laws, must be curtailed: hence the infringement upon a criminal’s liberty. Infringement upon a criminal’s life, here or abroad strikes many (rightly) as abhorrant. Human Rights groups have tried to remind Americans of this, but it’s apparently not workin’ for us…
Thank you, John, for this post. I delayed comment after following all your links & signing because there are some things that words can’t say. Thank you for being a feminist.
5 PodMonkeys // Jul 21, 2006 at 1:50 am
Miko, I agree that one should not encroach on anyone else’s right to life. I think what was nagging me was when is it legally our right to encroach on another countries laws and practices. In this case with the life at stake, I’m all for saving her. Especially since Iran, having signed an agreement saying they would not practice inhumane practices, has willfully agreed to outside judgement on their practices.
But what if they hadn’t signed the agreement? What are the boundries? Where do we draw the line at policing the world and making them behave like us? Who decides that our laws apply to the rest of world? Those are the thoughts I had.
Again, I’m all for saving her life, and the lives of anyone cruelly treated.
6 omg // Jul 21, 2006 at 8:39 pm
your site’s gay as fuck…so are diehard liberals who are fucking this country up…liberalism isn’t a religion so stop advocating it like it is, dumbshit.
7 John // Jul 22, 2006 at 9:55 pm
I’m going to let comment #6 speak for itself. I
I think that the conversation about state’s rights is an interesting one, but as Johnny pointed out, the UN is not going to “use force to impose its will,” so the question is largely theoretical, especially for an obscure case like this. Because the main goal of this post is to raise awareness, I hope that the main takeaway is that basic human rights are being deprived in horrible ways in Iran (and, as Joseph pointed out, in our own country).
I see myself as a dual citizen: of the world, and of the United States. My humanity takes precedence over my American-ness. The U.S. itself acknowledges this priority with the concept of inalienable rights–these don’t come from the government, but are inherent in all people. The problem is, as a citizen of the world, there are no representative institutions and only few that advocate for individuals (the U.N. represents states first, individuals second). Our ability to press for change is limited. One of of the options is to affect world public opinion.
So PM, I’d say that even if Iran hadn’t signed the agreement, we still have every right as fellow humans to tell the government of Iran that we notice and disapprove.
Miko, thanks for the link. I’m very biased towards Western liberal ideals, and I don’t see how shariah law and government based on individual rights can accommodate one another. I’m going to keep thinking about this.
8 John // Jul 22, 2006 at 9:56 pm
Miko, thank you for thinking of me as a feminist. I consider this high praise.
9 Miko // Jul 23, 2006 at 7:27 am
omg: May you be blessed. Namaste, sibling of mine.
10 Lily Mazahery // Aug 4, 2006 at 6:07 pm
To understand more about the brutalities facing the women and children in Iran under the occupying Islamic regime, I highly recommend watching the documentary aired on BBC last week. It is called “The Execution of a Teenage Girl.” As you watch this, or consider similar atrocities to which Iranians are currently subjected, please remember that such practices are NOT part of the Persian culture. The Sharia legal system did not exist in Iran until the Islamic regime took control of the government in Iran in 1979. The generations of women who included the mothers and grand mothers of these girls enjoyed rights, liberties, and legal status equal to their male countparts.
And THAT is the ultimate tragedy.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6742398877812379279&q=execution+teenage
Leave a Comment