This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Russian woman put on trial in Dubai for drinking juice in public

Russian woman put on trial in Dubai for drinking juice in public - Comments

DarwinsPitbull's Avatar Comment 1 by DarwinsPitbull

It serves her right. Who the hell does she think she is drinking juice in public? I say we execute any person found drinking any kind of beverage in public places. Even children who think they are so above everyone by drinking there bottles in public. Society has gone to far by letting these criminals go out and think they can drink a beverage in public when they are thirsty.

PS: We should also go after these people who think its perfectly okay to chew gum in public. Off with there heads.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 10:30:00 UTC | #240878

practicing atheis's Avatar Comment 2 by practicing atheis

after the billions of dollars that have been spent in the UAE by the government for the construction of the new hot spot tourist attraction for the jet-setters of the world, this makes no sense. in fact, it is just plain stupid. they are essentially going after the european leisure market and this incident will turn away more people than the fancy new buildings and man-made islands and indoor skiing facilities could ever attract. dumb-asses.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 10:48:00 UTC | #240888

TheHardProblem's Avatar Comment 3 by TheHardProblem

'Put on trial' is maybe put a little dramatic here, the woman is given a fine, something you get as well for speeding.
I find this to be pretty much acceptable, from a cultural point of view. It's not like this woman is put behind bars for 10 years or sentenced to death.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 10:49:00 UTC | #240889

Ex~'s Avatar Comment 4 by Ex~

lol, Islam. Muslims crack me up, in a sort of "holy shit it's a psychopath with a gun, but he is SOOO fucking backwards and stupid I have to laugh."

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 10:49:00 UTC | #240890

decius's Avatar Comment 5 by decius

Comment #254130 by TheHardProblem

'Put on trial' is maybe put a little dramatic here,


It is not, given the one-year maximum penalty.

I find this to be pretty much acceptable, from a cultural point of view.


Acceptable theocracy. Right.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 10:52:00 UTC | #240892

DamnDirtyApe's Avatar Comment 6 by DamnDirtyApe

Sounds a little too draconian for my liking.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 11:10:00 UTC | #240909

textnotspeech's Avatar Comment 7 by textnotspeech

TheHardProblem = Troll or Asshat

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 11:11:00 UTC | #240913

quantum_flux's Avatar Comment 8 by quantum_flux

Hahahaha! At least it wasn't fermented juice, or they may have gotten their heads chopped off for that.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 11:12:00 UTC | #240916

Sargeist's Avatar Comment 9 by Sargeist

They have their laws, and if we don't like them, we should not go to Dubai.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 11:16:00 UTC | #240920

History_Junky's Avatar Comment 10 by History_Junky

Meh, as Dubai and the UAE transition themselves from oil producing nations to ones whose main industry is based around tourism this will be a chance for the conservativeness of the countries to decrease as more and more foreigners enter the country.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 11:17:00 UTC | #240921

javb222's Avatar Comment 11 by javb222

The official punishment in Islam for drinking alcohol is 80 lashes with a whip.
Mainstream religion is so inconsistent and hypocritical...

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 11:29:00 UTC | #240940

kaiserkriss's Avatar Comment 12 by kaiserkriss

I'm sure every country has some dumb forgotten law that some overzealous cop can nail anyone with. The onus should be to abolish them, take them off the books or do whatever it takes.

AS for this particular incident: It would seem quite petty in my opinion, just as topless sunbathing on the beech would be. The city administration of a relatively cosmopolitan city such as Dubai should get with the times and recognize the fact not every tourist follows their particular brand of religion and show a bit of tolerance.jcw

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 11:32:00 UTC | #240943

PaulJ's Avatar Comment 13 by PaulJ

Capital punishment for parking offences and dropping litter!

Well if it clears the streets, why not? If you obey the law you've nothing to fear.

[/irony]

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 11:37:00 UTC | #240950

Sargeist's Avatar Comment 14 by Sargeist

If you obey the law you've nothing to fear.
Yes. And?

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 11:40:00 UTC | #240952

Greybishop's Avatar Comment 15 by Greybishop

I lived in Dubai for about 3 years in the 90's.

While I don't think it's reasonable to fine someone for drinking juice in public, the laws of the country are the laws of the country and while you're there, they apply to you. It makes no difference what one thinks is "right" or "wrong".

I personally think that many, many laws in my own country are silly and should be done away with, but I still have to abide by them.

Anyone travelling to a country where the laws are likely to differ widely from those in place on their native soil would be foolish not to at least google up some tourist information about local laws and customs before their trip.

If you can read and have been awake during the last decade, you are well aware that a travel destination in the Middle East is an adventure that warrants treading carefully in all things.

While this particular law has a religous root, other illegal activities that might earn one a slap on the wrist in the West carry significantly more serious punishments in Middle Eastern nations. If a tourist doesn't bother to check these things, it's their own fault when they get into trouble. Unless, of course, they are not guilty. There seems to be no question of guilt in this case.

I'm not defending the silly law, just pointing out that EVERY nation has its share of silly laws, but silliness doesn't mean that they can be ignored.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:05:00 UTC | #240974

D'Arcy's Avatar Comment 16 by D'Arcy

All that foreign capital poured into Palm Island and the others, make Dubai a prime target for the next 9/11. Maybe the local Sheik is making a show of his Islamic credentials to avoid just such a catastrophe.

No way would I go topless or expose any of my precious skin to the sun in Dubai for more than 2 minutes, but then I was born in Scotland!

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:08:00 UTC | #240975

Sargeist's Avatar Comment 17 by Sargeist

Greybishop,

Hear hear.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:08:00 UTC | #240976

the great teapot's Avatar Comment 18 by the great teapot

What the fuck does Meh mean.
I mean, how the hell do you even pronounce it.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:17:00 UTC | #240985

Greybishop's Avatar Comment 19 by Greybishop

Thanks Sargeist.

A re-read of the article revealed this nugget that I missed the first time.

The young people told the court that they were not Muslims and were thus unaware of the fact that their actions could be punishable.


Young people? Since when are 28 and 30 year old adults "young people". It's made to sound as if they should get special consideration because they're so young.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:28:00 UTC | #240997

8teist's Avatar Comment 20 by 8teist

Serves her right,I mean, what was she doing out in public anyway?........She is supposed to be in her natural habitat,the kitchen barefoot and pregnant, damn militant feminists ,drinking juice in public,whatever next?

The planet is going to hell in a handbasket :o

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:32:00 UTC | #241003

Samir Nayanajaad's Avatar Comment 21 by Samir Nayanajaad

I have to agree with Greybishop on this. He said what I was thinking.

Also the great teapot meh is pronounced like meth with out the "th" sound and it means that you are indifferent about a subject, sort of like shrugging your shoulders only in a word.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:38:00 UTC | #241009

Sargeist's Avatar Comment 22 by Sargeist

Greybishop,

In an attempt to be accommodating, I can probably see that people might have thought that, not being Muslim, they were exempt from the rules about Ramadan. I can see myself thinking that, too, which is why (of course) I think it is reasonable. But the difference is that I would have found out if this were true. Ignorance of the law is no excuse because, I presume, it would be an overused defence otherwise.

I guess that they were described as young people in an attempt, akin to other recent threads, to portray them as innocent and undeserving of punishment.

I was thinking of silly laws in this country (UK) and the one about not being allowed to protest outside Parliament without prior permission (or similar to that anyway) came to mind. I think it is silly, but I do know about it and so if I go and protest anyway I can hardly be surprised if I am arrested.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:39:00 UTC | #241010

Frankus1122's Avatar Comment 23 by Frankus1122

TheHardProblem said:


I find this to be pretty much acceptable, from a cultural point of view.


Wrong.

Greybishop said:

While I don't think it's reasonable to fine someone for drinking juice in public, the laws of the country are the laws of the country and while you're there, they apply to you. It makes no difference what one thinks is "right" or "wrong".


Right.

The laws of the land are the laws of the land. No arguement. But that the laws of the land are reasonable and acceptable is arguable. In fact, to say something is acceptable because it is part of a cultural history is stupid.
South Africa had system of legal racial segregation less than 20 years ago. Was that acceptable?
Just because something is institutionalized or part of a culture does not automatically make it okay.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:41:00 UTC | #241014

Greybishop's Avatar Comment 24 by Greybishop

Frankus1122 said:

The laws of the land are the laws of the land. No arguement. But that the laws of the land are reasonable and acceptable is arguable. In fact, to say something is acceptable because it is part of a cultural history is stupid.
South Africa had system of legal racial segregation less than 20 years ago. Was that acceptable? Just because something is institutionalized or part of a culture does not automatically make it okay.


Agreed. However, unless a person is in another country as an activist to try to fight unjust or unreasonable laws, acceptable or unacceptable is a moot point.

Tourists need to be aware that they don't take the laws of their homeland with them when they go abroad. It might seem silly to someone from the South of France to arrest a woman for sunbathing topless, but no amount of indignation will change the fact that it's an illegal act in Dubai. The same applies to someone from Amsterdam lighting a joint at at cafe in Chicago.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 13:03:00 UTC | #241033

Janus's Avatar Comment 25 by Janus

Sigh.

The point isn't that it is legal to drink juice in Dubai. We know it's illegal.

Nor is the point that there is some greater purpose to saying that it shouldn't be illegal. We know it's pointless; so is most or all of the stuff we post on this website.

Nor is the point that the countries we live in do not also have many silly rules. We know they have silly rules, although those rules are a lot less numerous and a lot less barbaric than Dubai's.

Nor is the point that these tourists weren't dumb for failing to find out what Dubai's silly laws are before going there. We know they were dumb.


The point is that fining or imprisoning people for drinking juice is morally wrong.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 13:20:00 UTC | #241052

Greybishop's Avatar Comment 26 by Greybishop

Janus wrote:

The point is that fining or imprisoning people for drinking juice is morally wrong.


I would say that the point is that to the lawmakers in Dubai, drinking juice at certain times is morally wrong. In this case, they have the law of the land on their side.

Many people think that imprisoning or fining someone for smoking the leaves of certain plants is morally wrong. Their opinion is trumped by the laws of the land, in most cases.

Every country has laws and expects citizens and tourists alike to abide by them. To suggest that our (Western) morality is somehow superior to the morality of another nation is akin to suggesting that our laws should supplant theirs. I believe we all get pretty upset around here when we hear the reverse suggested.

I'm not saying that I personally think it's not morally wrong to imprison someone for drinking juice, rather I'm saying that my personal opinion on the morality has no bearing on the situation. To suggest otherwise is wishful thinking, and if you happen to be a tourist who feels that personally held moral stances should supercede the law of the land, it's wishful thinking of a very dangerous sort.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 13:39:00 UTC | #241070

Swordmaiden's Avatar Comment 28 by Swordmaiden

but it's not about the law itself, it's the craziness of the whole issue of them actually believing in a god who would be pissed off if you drink juice on a certain day.
A god who wants you to NOT EAT at certain times.
A god who tells you what to do and what not to do AT ALL!
I despair!
oh and D'arcy...your avatar made me laugh! Would make a good bumper sticker!

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 13:47:00 UTC | #241082

Jaz's Avatar Comment 27 by Jaz

total nonsense Greybishop.

Your analogy of "smoking certain leaves" as ANOTHER example of ambigiuous individual morality is totally misplaced because this moral decision is linked in to on secular ideals, such as effects on health and society influence

This, however, is an example of absolute 100% irrationality which ONLY exists because of loyalty to absurd religious traditions.

No-one doesn't feel it isn't the responsibility for tourists to adhere to foreign laws, but to actually stand up for the law itself and compare it to other secular laws is laughable. It has nothing to do with eastern vs western morality, why are you bringing that into it

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 13:47:00 UTC | #241080

Greybishop's Avatar Comment 29 by Greybishop

Jaz wrote:

This, however, is an example of absolute 100% irrationality which ONLY exists because of loyalty to absurd religious traditions.


Having lived there, I can tell you that in the opinions of the local constabulary, there is zero difference between a secular or religiously influenced law.

I'm not defending the law itself, merely using examples to illustrate the point.

I wholeheartedly agree that the law is laughable and its roots even more so. That's not and never was my point.

Jaz further wrote:

It has nothing to do with eastern vs western morality, why are you bringing that into it
?

Actually, Janus brought up the morality issue when suggesting that
The point is that fining or imprisoning people for drinking juice is morally wrong.


I was simply pointing out that the idea of morality is to at least a degree dependant on perspective. We dislike it when it's suggested that Sharia Law should be applied anywhere in the West, so to suggest that a Western definition of the morality of a law should apply in a Middle Eastern country seems at least problematic.

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 14:03:00 UTC | #241103

clintonjason's Avatar Comment 30 by clintonjason

hang on a minute... ...what juice was that?? Was it orange juice? Was it apple juice?? WAS IT COCONUT JUICE???

I am genuinely horrified... I mean... drinking orange juice... in a public space... during the day...

U N D E R - T H E - S U N !!!!!

There's no more religion nowadays... ;)

Thu, 25 Sep 2008 14:11:00 UTC | #241112