Hmm. If he is being prosecuted for teasing fasting Muslims with food, it is just idiotic and with absolutely no legal precedence from authentic Islamic history. (Yes, I am a fasting Muslim too)
Problem with "hurting the sentiments" style cases everywhere is that usually there is absolutely no guidelines or legal framework on what constitutes "hurting the sentiments" and it boils down to the men/women judging the case.
> Hmm. If he is being prosecuted for teasing fasting Muslims with food, it is just idiotic and with absolutely no legal precedence from authentic Islamic history. (Yes, I am a fasting Muslim too)
Shouldn't teasing be part of the challenge of fasting? If fasting was easy, why even do it?
It doesn't have to be, but at the same time it is not a issue of "hurting the sentiments" at all.
As I mentioned in my other comment:
From religious POV, a fasting Muslim actually gets extra reward when other people eat in front of him. There are numerous incidents from authenticated Islamic history that show when a fasting Muslim was offered food, he/she would refuse saying "I am fasting and they(Muslims and non Muslims alike, even Prophet himself) would continue eating.
Such problems generally stem from ignorance and [it pains me to say] "I am the saviour of Islam" complex of [some]Muslims as a direct result of ignorance.
I am a Hindu Indian Singaporean, and i believe he is being made a scapegoat not for his actual prank, but as a deterrent to others to not do these type of things.
Problem with "hurting the sentiments" style cases everywhere is that usually there is absolutely no guidelines or legal framework on what constitutes "hurting the sentiments" and it boils down to the men/women judging the case.