Hi I looked over the list of Ahadith in the link you posted, and here is what I have to say about them: Number 1: This is not a complete version of the story. The hands and feet were cut because the people were highway robbers (and that is their punishment, as mentioned in the Quran), and the other punishments were inflicted upon them because that is what they had done to the old man who took care of them. The people who were being punished in this manner were extremely evil people; they went to a man to get treatment, and then, when he had helped them without asking for anything, they stole his flock and tortured him to death. As for the drinking of camel urine, this was done because that was the cure they used at that time to treat the ailment that the group of men were suffering from. Modern medicine uses similarly strange ingredients to treat various maladies as well, so I don't see how anyone could complain about that point. Number 2 & 3: Stoning is the Islamic punishment for adultery. I don't really see what the complaint here is. The people were not wronged; they admitted to their guilt without being forced to do so, and were then punished accordingly. If someone wants to criticize the punishment of stoning, I would ask him upon what basis does he feel the need to criticize it? Number 4: Interestingly enough, no reference was given for this one. There's no real need to expound upon it before we can determine whether it is legitimate or not. Number 5 & 6: This one really illustrates the ignorance of the person who compiled this list. The first hadith is referenced to "al-Bayhaq," while the second it to "al-Baihaqee." The person apparently didn't even know enough to realize that there is no one named "al-Bayhaq," and that both are from the same person, i.e. al-Bayhaqi ! Furthermore, the website's compiler makes an interesting commentary upon this hadith, where he/she states that circumcision is not part of Islam because it is not mentioned in the Quran. Here, we see that the compiler has denied this practice based upon his denial of Hadith, but he places this commentary in a piece that is supposed to refute the legitimacy of Hadith. This is clearly circular. Getting to the actual content of the Hadiths in question, I simply ask what is wrong with female circumcision? Is it wrong because the Western world names it "genital mutilation?" Or is there some objective criteria that can be utilized to say that is wrong absolutely? Actually, I wont even bother with the rest, because they are either twisted away from their true meaning, or are instances where the complier decided the Hadith was wrong because it conflicted with the liberal secular Humanist philosophy that is forced down our throats nowadays. So, I'll conclude with this: If you, like the complier of that list you've posted, have decide that secular Humanism, or some other philosophy is the truth and then want to see if Islam is the right religion for you, then it is most likely not. Islam is not designed to be compatible with any other philosophy, and the expectation that it should be is ludicrous. Unless whatever you are comparing Islam to a set of objective criteria, then any judgments made about Islam will be suffer from a biased prospective, and will be meaningless to anyone except you and perhaps those that have the same viewpoints as you.