350 lashes for possession of alcohol

[Phrossack]

Well, 1. it's a foreign country, 2. one that does not pretend to observe basic human rights and stuff unlike the United States which really should practice what it preaches maybe, 3. said person chose out of own free will to live in said country in full knowledge of what the laws are, 4. it is not a human right to be able to possess/drink alcohol, 5. lashes is not a particularly extreme punishment from the perspective of most people outside of Western liberals; they are very painful, sure, but there's a strong case for it being more humane than long jail sentences endured by minor drug offenders in the United States, as it doesn't tear families apart, rob young people of opportunities, costs billions of dollars in both incarceration cost and lost income, and so on.

Edit: missed the bit about him being 74 years old. In this case I'm more in favour of leniency due to health concerns.

If they made it punishable by hundreds of lashes to sing, at all, anywhere, would you still blame the victim and say, "Well, it's so easy to just choose to never sing, so you have it coming if you do"?

And the fact that you listed #2 is one of the problems with people: It seems as if people believe that hypocrisy is the greatest possible offense, and that any evil is acceptable as long as you're honest about it. I see people acting like this is true over and over and over. I'm sure there are apologists (not that you're one) out there who excuse Saudi crucifixion because at least they're honest about it...

 

[aelf]

I think his hypocrisy is a more salient issue. Everything is peachy until it happens to you.

 

[BvBPL]

He's 74 so this will probably kill him, just for having some wine. Talking with a friend of mine he said he will probably be able to pay a fine in the end and escape it. Don't know if that's accurate.

Given that he's already served fourteen months on a years sentence, getting away with a fine seems unlikely.

 

[NovaKart]

Given that he's already served fourteen months on a years sentence, getting away with a fine seems unlikely.

I'm not saying it would be like a traffic ticket fine. If his family puts together a lot of money and the court takes his age into consideration maybe they'll agree to that.

 

[warpus]

How many lashes for possession of bacon?

 

[FriendlyFire]

Where is the petition to stop our leaders from kissing their leaders? Why aren't the US and the UK incessantly insisting the UNSC pass harsh resolutions against them?

When they run out of Oil

 

[Formaldehyde]

Living in Saudi Arabia and making a fortune from Saudi oil does very much involve supporting the powers that be in Saudi Arabia. We can criticise governments for their involvement with the Saudi regime, can we not also criticise individuals?

Absolutely. That wasn't clear from my comment when I called your post a "very good point" while stating he should have known what the consequences were for his actions?

He made the intentional choice to live there in order to get rich. He also made the intentional choice to defy their laws. While I do still feel sympathy for someone who has to undergo any sort of barbaric punishment such as this (which should have obviously disappeared long ago with any other forms of torture), and I am certainly opposed to prohibition, I have no sympathy at all for them punishing him for breaking their laws in some non-barbaric form that is not cruel and excessive.

Do I even really need to say all this?

The assumption of a lot of posters so far seems to be that all laws are just, so you have it coming if you get extreme punishments for breaking any of them. Are these the same people who are upset with the US's tendency to imprison so many people for minor offenses in the war on drugs?

And the fact that you listed #2 is one of the problems with people: It seems as if people believe that hypocrisy is the greatest possible offense, and that any evil is acceptable as long as you're honest about it. I see people acting like this is true over and over and over. I'm sure there are apologists (not that you're one) out there who excuse Saudi crucifixion because at least they're honest about it...

Here are prime examples of the incredibly nonsensical assumptions which frequently occur in this forum if you don't spend a few hours on each post detailing your opinion in every way possible.

Not only should it have been quite clear from my original post what my opinions in this matter likely were, not a single person has even insinuated that he be whipped, much less anybody else, for any possible reason whatsoever. Yet here we must indeed make it quite clear that is what we think.

Ironically, it even suggests we are all hypocrites by being opposed to the nonsensical war on drugs where so many blacks end up incarcerated for merely smoking pot and not this barbaric punishment, while at the same time even railing against the nonsensical strawman that we think hypocrisy is the greatest crime imaginable.

When they run out of Oil

That is indeed likely what will be necessary.

 

[Cheetah]

The Sauds are evil, and the sentence is completely outrageous, of course.

However, as this guy has voluntarily moved there, worked there and thus supported the regime, I'm sensing a bit of schadenfreude at his misfortune.

I am far more enraged when these evils befall innocents who's only crime was to be born in Saud-controlled Arabia. Raif Badawi for instance, or Ali Mohammed al-Nimr.

 

[bhavv]

I also change my opinion now. Since I came to the realization of his choice to live and work there for so long, thus supporting such a regime, while choosing to break the law regarding alcohol.

Unless he previously spoke out against, or tried to prevent lashings sentenced to anyone else, he lacks any logical reason to speak out against his own sentence.

Other than of course, 'things only becoming a problem when they happen to you'. But it is clear that for all those 25 years, other people getting lashings was not a concern of his, nor to his family. Im sure that there are many other people of his age or even older within the last 25 years that were given similar sentences, and yet nothing was ever done to oppose them.

 

[aelf]

Other than of course, 'things only becoming a problem when they happen to you'. But it is clear that for all those 25 years, other people getting lashings was not a concern of his, nor to his family. Im sure that there are many other people of his age or even older within the last 25 years that were given similar sentences, and yet nothing was ever done to oppose them.

That's actually more in reference to him. Obviously, we should not support such methods of punishment, but this man implicitly did. He seemed quite content with his implicit support until now that they've turned against him.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

If they made it punishable by hundreds of lashes to sing, at all, anywhere, would you still blame the victim and say, "Well, it's so easy to just choose to never sing, so you have it coming if you do"?

And the fact that you listed #2 is one of the problems with people: It seems as if people believe that hypocrisy is the greatest possible offense, and that any evil is acceptable as long as you're honest about it. I see people acting like this is true over and over and over. I'm sure there are apologists (not that you're one) out there who excuse Saudi crucifixion because at least they're honest about it...

I think what it comes down to in this case is that many feel they would not drink alcohol if it was under such a harsh punishment / think it to be reckless and as a consequence they have less (or none at all) sympathy for someone who did and now receives the punishment.
(It is different with cannabis in the US etc because they can more easily identify with Americans who smoke it.)
Then they rationalize it. The rationalization is rather flimsy, exactly because it is not they actual motivation to even laugh at this guy. Their motivation is that this person crossed rules they can not identify with crossing and for that this person received rewards they would not receive. In such a situation, there is a natural urge to feel delight when this person then is punished for it.

Of course you can be aware of why you feel delight and then such delight can quickly vanish, because it is a primtive and nasty way to think. Or you can embrace it, by justifying it with ad-hoc rationals.

 

[JollyRoger]

It's not called the English vice for nothing. The wily Brit has tricked the Saudis into giving him what many Brits would pay good money for.

 

[BvBPL]

If the standard for being punished due to the reprehensible acts of others is merely commercial engagement then most of us should be in chains for buying smart phones made from Chinese slave labor.

 

[aelf]

I think what it comes down to in this case is that many feel they would not drink alcohol if it was under such a harsh punishment / think it to be reckless and as a consequence they have less (or none at all) sympathy for someone who did and now receives the punishment.
(It is different with cannabis in the US etc because they can more easily identify with Americans who smoke it.)
Then they rationalize it. The rationalization is rather flimsy, exactly because it is not they actual motivation to even laugh at this guy. Their motivation is that this person crossed rules they can not identify with crossing and for that this person received rewards they would not receive. In such a situation, there is a natural urge to feel delight when this person then is punished for it.

Of course you can be aware of why you feel delight and then such delight can quickly vanish, because it is a primtive and nasty way to think. Or you can embrace it, by justifying it with ad-hoc rationals.

This is called making assumptions about other people without listening to them.

It happens a lot, I know.

If the standard for being punished due to the reprehensible acts of others is merely commercial engagement then most of us should be in chains for buying smart phones made from Chinese slave labor.

Oh, I actually thought about this one!

Let me be clear, I'm not saying that not advocating that this person be spared is a rational position. It's not. But it does make sense that people would not empathise with him. So why we are perfectly fine with using smart phones made by slave labour using cobalt mined in highly dubious conditions? It's clearly not a good thing, but it's far more difficult to get by without smart phones today than it is to get by without going to Saudi Arabia on the promise of easy(er) money and then knowingly breaking the draconian laws that enable you to earn easy money in the first place. He made a few more conscious and silly decisions that led to his predicament than your average person does when buying a smart phone.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

I did listen. Had enough of it. _shrug_
But I expected nothing else than lazy reflexive "How do you know what is my motivation?" -blabla
People aren't that complicated to not be able to make some good guesses about their motivation.

 

[aelf]

Yeah, how do you know what is my motivation indeed?

I was assuming you merely didn't read what people are saying. I certainly did not expect that you read it and then imagined that people have some other motivation that they did not express. That's just... far below the standards I was expecting.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

I am not sure in what kind of naive simple world you live in. It in any case seems to be ruled with an iron fist by useful and important but also superficial standards of good discussion (or maybe not, given how you repeatedly violate such standards yourself in a not so productive way with your temper - but let's leave that aside) Those are guidelines, dude, no reason to turn off your brain.

Because see in my world, it can be very fruitful to try to analyze people rather than to just hang on every word they say. That is what I did and I shared my findings. You are welcome to disagree with them, but to want to forbid me to even do so is ridiculous and childish.

 

[aelf]

Well, I am not sure what kind of naive simple world you live in. It seems to be governed by rules that you make up for your own convenience, whereby you are free to "analyze people rather than to just hang on every word they say" but are also free from being called out on a BS analysis; otherwise, you'd cry about it and... go home, I guess?

 

[BvBPL]

Oh, I actually thought about this one!

Let me be clear, I'm not saying that not advocating that this person be spared is a rational position. It's not. But it does make sense that people would not empathise with him. So why we are perfectly fine with using smart phones made by slave labour using cobalt mined in highly dubious conditions? It's clearly not a good thing, but it's far more difficult to get by without smart phones today than it is to get by without going to Saudi Arabia on the promise of easy(er) money and then knowingly breaking the draconian laws that enable you to earn easy money in the first place. He made a few more conscious and silly decisions that led to his predicament than your average person does when buying a smart phone.

Surely a Kitty Genovese-type phenomenon is at work as well. One guy getting whipped for bathtub wine is a human rights catastrophe, a million Chinese making iPhones in labor camps is progress.

I appreciate you coming at the question with an eye towards intent. That sort if muddles the question though as to our moral responsibility. Joe Ignorant does know how iPhones are made; you and I do. Does that knowledge impose upon us a greater moral responsibility?

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Well, I am not sure what kind of naive simple world you live in. It seems to be governed by rules that you make up for your own convenience, whereby you are free to "analyze people rather than to just hang on every word they say" but are also free from being called out on a BS analysis; otherwise, you'd cry about it and... go home, I guess?

So, I take it you do not have anything substantial to say?
That explains why you seem to grasp for any way to attack my position other than actually addressing its content.
You are welcome to explain to me why it is "BS", so far you just haven't even tried (other than by simply forbidding me to analyze people.. ). It is baffling how you haven't noticed this yourself.