A Wiltshire man has gone on the run in Thailand after being sentenced to jail in the Philippines for breaking the country's strict adultery laws. David Scott, who fled to Thailand with his Filipina partner Cynthia Delfino, was facing a nine year prison sentence. Cynthia Delfino had separated from her husband when she met David Scott and they now have a baby daughter, Janina. South Swindon MP, Anne Snelgrove, said he had grounds for a compassionate case and is helping him to get visas. Under Philippine law it is illegal to have a relationship with a married man or woman, even if they are separated.
Nine years, eh ? It's illegal in Korea too. (And in Islamic countries, where the penalties can include death by stoning - as they did in New Testament Israel). I'm pretty sure it would have been illegal in Commonwealth days, too (apparently a capital offence under Cromwell).
While the Puritans appeared to take a loose position on fornication they severely punished adultery and they executed homosexuals.
I said the Taleban were modern Puritans !
8 comments:
Oh and did the Puritans force women to cover up from head to toe? not even allowing them to show their face?
Did Puritans prevent women from having medical treatment?
Did Puritans prevent women from going to school?
Did Puritans go on the rampage destroying historical monuments?
Did Puritans stop people from having pictures of living things?
Did Puritans attempt to ban music?
They got nothing on the Taliban.
Executing homosexuals isn't unusual in an historical context is it?
Did Puritans go on the rampage destroying historical monuments?
Well I believe they did treat a few (RC)churches a bit roughly. But no, not to the degree of our vibrant Muslim friends.
Did Puritans attempt to ban music?
I think they were a bit down on it, banning Christmas carols, dancing round the maypole Ive heard, though that may be a myth. Again not in the same league as the Taleban.
Covering up - no
Medical treatment - no
going to school - no
destroying monuments - yes
pictures - destroyed all the church ones or painted over them
ban music and dancing - yes - they also banned Christmas
Even covering up earns an "in part" from the puritans. They were very strict regarding acceptable dress. They may not have imposed the burqa but a bonnet covering the hair was expected of women. Whole outfits for men and women were strictly defined down to the colours acceptable.
Cromwell himself was actually rather keen on secular music - he just disapproved of it in a religious context. Both male and female ultra-puritans often cropped their hair (I have no idea how they thought they squared this with biblical "crowning glory" etc.)
The situation on adultery is rather interesting. The Scots definitely did execute people for this (both sexes). Theoretically the English were supposed to, but there is only one known instance where it was actually carried out.
There is a difference between destroying specific pictures and monuments in a religous context and trying to ban all as the Taliban did.
Adultery is illegal in many (most?) American states, too. I can't recall hearing of any significant efforts to enforce the law by states.
It is also forbidden under our military codes, and has sometimes ruined an officer's career.
You missed one characteristic of the Puritans: their intellectual intolerance, when compared both to earlier Christians and to later secular thinkers. Would you say that it is the Islamics who are most active in prosecuting reseachers into certain emperical questions, or some other set of people?
Post a Comment