An Actual Witchunt

I know what you're thinking about the title- "Obviously."

But let's take a look at this controversy in Saudi Arabia.

You can read about it here, but I'll explain.

A woman named Fawza Falih was arrested and condemned to death for, get this, Witchcraft. She was detained for 35 days by Saudi Arabia's religious police, and was beaten to the point of hospitalization throughout this time. How could Saudi Arabia have a law against Witchcraft of all things? Here's the kicker- it doesn't. Saudi Arabia does not have a written penal code, and Witchcraft is not a defined crime. Yet on these charges, a panel of three judges decided that this woman was guilty. In the process, they refused her access to a lawyer, banned a relative arguing on her behalf, refused to allow a cross-examination of the accusing witness, and forced her to sign a confession which she couldn't read BECAUSE SHE WAS ILLITERATE.

There has historically been a correlation between backwardness and religion, and here it is presently at work. Islamic law provides a nebulous justification for the men in power in Saudi Arabia. Islamic tradition is sufficiently powerful, when invoked, to legitimate even the most blatant violations of human rights. Yet the civil rights of this woman were not violated BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T HAVE THEM TO BEGIN WITH. When an appeals court overturned the decision to execute her, Saudi prosecutors persisted, arguing that it was in "the public interest" that she be put to death by the State.

This is an extreme example of why we should not allow Church and State to mix, even at their most minor points of intersection. When law is based in religion, it derives its legitimacy from something ethereal; literally the least objective thing in the world. The obvious couner point is that religion offers good morals. No. Religious morals, by definition, depend on something transcendent and undefinable. Good government grows from the ground up.