Some Thoughts On Hudud

Was about to write something on Hudud and it became so technical. Then I found (of all people) Raja Petra's article on Hudud. Hah! One of the rare moments I agree with his views.
http://www.malaysia-today.net/you-cant-debate-hudud/ 

Let me add. Firstly, you must be able to distinguish between Hudud Laws and implementing Hudud Laws. I said this in my previous post, people must realise the difference between Islam and Muslims. The former is perfect while the latter isn't. So don't blame the perfect Islam because of the imperfect Muslims. Secondly, you must know the difference between the acts punishable under the Hudud and don’t get mixed up. Zina has nothing to do with rape. Theft is different from robbery.

The Shariah is meant to keep people feel safe and secure in your homes or on the streets. It jealously protects the Maqasid Shariah. Hence the punishments which relates to the deprivation of these fundamental breaches of Shariah are very severe and radical and it must be across the board. This is especially so if the act involves the Sultans and Ministers as well as their wives and their kids. Even the Prophet SAW said that he would cut his own beloved daughter’s hand if she was found committing theft.

Take theft for example. The idea of theft stems from the rules governing property in Islam. The act of stealing means it is done in stealth, in an area that is known to be protected and the subject matter is an expensive item. What this means is that the security of the owner’s property was jeopardized and the thief didn't even allow the owner a chance to defend his rights. That's the worst depravity.

Hudud works in a paradox. You cannot establish Hudud unless the circumstances allow it to be implemented and by establishing Hudud, you will obtain the circumstances necessary to implement Hudud.

You can also read some of my comments on Zina here:http://adamalhabshi.blogspot.com/2012/01/hadd-on-zina.html and here:http://adamalhabshi.blogspot.com/2010/04/consent-is-difference.html