Posted 18 May 2003 - 05:55 AM
I understand the intention is admirable, but your contribution may not have the effect you desire. I just happened to run into this article;
"Toronto Star columnist Michele Landsberg wrote a May 10th column titled "E-petition to save Amina could harm, not help". It was concerning the case of Amina Lawal, who was sentenced to be stoned to death by a Sharia court in Nigeria for unwed sex. Many petitions (including one at Oprah's site) have surfaced to "save" Amina, but none of them will be effective, say officials at BAOBAB, a legal defense fund set up for women sentenced to death under Sharia law.
According to Landsberg, BAOBAB says that the Sharia courts see Western non-Muslims as "infidels", resent their meddling and have complete disregard for their opinions. In fact, "contemptuous e-mails from Western sources merely inflame the defiant attitudes of Taliban-type local leaders and spur them to ever harsher and more extreme actions". Also, these petitions imply that villagers are helpless victims who must be rescued by the white cowboys over in 'Merrica.
BAOBAB argues cases in the Sharia courts from a Muslim perpective, with expertise in Islamic law. In all of the cases that BAOBAB has argued on appeal, none of the original sentences of stoning have been carried out."
What you may want to consider is that alarmist e-mails like this just inflame racial resentment and oversimplify complex cultural issues.
Magikman
Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep insights can be winnowed from deep nonsense. ~ Carl Sagan
"...man has an irrepressible tendency to read meaning into the buzzing confusion of sights and sounds impinging on his senses; and where no agreed meaning can be found, he will provide it out of his own imagination." ~ Arthur Koestler