>>>>>>>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38861919/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Again, attempting to generalize from the specific. There are about a billion Muslims in the world and they don't all drive nails into people's bodies.
>>>>>
>>>>>ya, well where are the muslums giving to charity, or visiting the elderly, or sending money to poor countries, or...
>>>>>
>>>>>All you ever hear about when it comes to Islam is people being killed or maimed - all in the name Allah.
>>>>
>>>>Why didn't you answer my simple question? What has religion got to do with this? Or do you mean that since this happened in Sri Lanka, the people involved had to belong to Islam? AFAIK Charles Manson lived in California, so using the same reasoning, you must sympathize with him?
>>>
>>>Not jumping into this discussion other than to clarify for lurkers - it happened in Saudi Arabia, not Sri Lanka. She returned to Sri Lanka and went to the hospital there for treatment.
>>>
>>>I think, if you know anything about Saudi Arabia, that is clear enough... there's a 3% chance that the family was not Muslim... but still possible. More concerning is not the religion but the law which does not guarantee freedom of religion (or none thereof) nor does it give rights to or protect women and children.
>>>
>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia
>>
>>OK, it was in Audi Arabia, my fault. But I still don't see why this ANYTHING to do with religion!
>
>In the sense of what protection under the law she had (NONE) while there. You do know it's constitution and laws are all based on the Qur'an and Shari'a law, right?
>
>http://www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/sa00000_.html
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_Law_of_Saudi_Arabia

Totally irrelevant in this case. Does the article say that these people were allowed to hammer the nails into her? The thing is that since this happened in a country where most people have a certain religion, the religion itself is to blame?