Would like to understand you people..

[Cabdullahi]

i would like to understand you people as if we're extraterrestrial creatures

 

[Woodrow]

Regardless of the context, do you all honestly think that killing someone for leaving Islam is right under any circumstances?

You say that a 'sincere Muslim' would act 'as Muslms' but I personally think that the average Muslim would have nothing to do with it. All it would take is one scholar and a mass of blind anger. Do you think that these laws should have been laid out a bit more clearly?

Just my opinion, for leaving Islam and nothing else, I do not think it is right to kill them.

I do not believe Sharia requires that either. the death penalty for apostacy is quite difficult to implement and does not focus on simply killing a person because they have decided they no longer want to be Muslim. There has to be witnessed actions that can prove the person is a danger to the country.

Yes, mob rule can and does result in violents actions. Us humans sometimes fail to think, mob rule and vigilante justice does occur and it is not limited to Islam. Up until the early 1960s it was very common throughout the Southern US, to a point that almost made it look like regular Saturday Night Entertainment.

Mob rule and vigilante justice is not Islam it is not even human, it is humans failing to act as humans.

 

[Muslim Woman]

Salaam/Peace

.. do you all honestly think that killing someone for leaving Islam is right under any circumstances?

when Prophet pbuh described about his night journey ( Jerusalem to heaven and returned back ) then several new Muslims could not believe him and left Islam . I have not read that any single one was killed because of this . So , i think , it's clear that if one does not do any harmful things to Muslim or Islam , then there is no punishment.

related link:

Is Apostasy a Capital Crime in Islam?
By Dr. Jamal Badawi


[Behold, as for those who come to believe, and then deny the truth, and again come to believe, and again deny the truth, and thereafter grow stubborn in their denial of truth - God will not forgive them, nor will guide them in any way.] (An-Nisaa' 4:137)


It is important to note in the above verse that if the Qur'an prescribes capital punishment for apostasy, then the apostate should be killed after the first instance of apostasy. As such there would be no opportunity to "again come to believe and again deny the truth, and thereafter grow stubborn in their denial of truth". In spite of these acts of repeated apostasy, no capital punishment is prescribed for them

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/...sh-Living_Shariah/LSELayout&cid=1178724000686

 

[Grofica]

I dont know thomas i welcome you to the board but honestly i dont think you are here to talk or to understand you just want to rant and rave...

 

[Pygoscelis]

The problem here is the joining of church and state in Islam. Too often I have heard that treason need not be against the country, but can be against the religion too. If an ex muslim were to become a Christian for example and start preaching salvation through Jesus, many muslims have told me that would be treason and would rightly be punishable by death. That very much alarms me. Especially given that Islam itself is a religion that preaches to outsiders (creating a deadly double standard).

 

[Grofica]

The problem here is the joining of church and state in Islam. Too often I have heard that treason need not be against the country, but can be against the religion too. If an ex muslim were to become a Christian for example and start preaching salvation through Jesus, many muslims have told me that would be treason and would rightly be punishable by death. That very much alarms me. Especially given that Islam itself is a religion that preaches to outsiders (creating a deadly double standard).

America was founded on the same principle the only difference is everyone is trying to be so politically correct now. The problem with america is we took away religion from state. as soon as we took morals away from schools and government is when america started to go down the tubes...

remember columbine?????

 

[Pygoscelis]

I do remember columbine. I also remember Jim Jones, Heaven's Gate, David Koresh, and 9/11.

 

[Karl]

Hello Thomas,

It all depends exactly what you mean by "assimilation" here.

Firstly, just WHY exactly is it essential for a foreigner to "assimilate"? As long as they obey your laws and don't create trouble, then there is simply no real NEED to assimilate to your "British ways". Secondly, it is simply not POSSIBLE for immigrants who's religions are completely extraneous to the "British way" to assimilate to that. For to do so would definitely be in some form of violation of their religious tenets. This is something that does not apply to Islam alone, but also other religions such as Hindu, other Christian denominations, Jews etc.

Put the shoe on the other foot for a moment too. Just think if you went over to Saudi Arabia. Are YOU going to assimilate to Arab culture and have 4 wives who dress in burquas, you dressing in Arab garb as well, spend a lot of your time inside mosques, eating falafel and kebabs all day and never crave for a single bottle of beer? When you take a summer holiday over to Spain for a few weeks, are you then going to learn Spanish, go to bullfights, take up the flamenco guitar and burn your mouth out with chilies all day? NO, you're NOT, BECAUSE you are British, that is your whole identity. And that's why those from foreign lands who come into your country don't have an interest in living your way of life. They aren't interested in sitting in pubs all night, picking up loose women, and going to soccer matches to have riots. Many immigrants simply are not interested in many or most aspects of your culture, and you should not automatically take this as a "snub". It's just that they come from backgrounds just too alien to yours and are unable or disinterested to switch to your "way of life", just as you would probably have complete disinterest in living like an Arab if you moved to Saudi. Do you understand now where I'm coming from here?

Also don't be too quick to assume that it is Muslims who are responsible for bringing down your Christmas trees there. There are a LOT of communists and atheists around these days who's agenda is to destroy Christianity. Muslim's know too well that Christianity is the religious tradition of your country, and they respect that. I don't believe that Muslims would be responsible for trying to undermine and threaten Christianity. They know that doing so would be equivalently audacious as pockets of British Christians living in Saudi trying to bring down mosques and banning Eids.

The MAIN problem is that England has a very left wing government that has for long been trying to knock out the monarchy, and British conservative culture, and has implemented policies that encourage intoducing all kinds of foreign ethic groups and their extraneous cultures and religions. This is the reason why you have introduced your "problems". Your government has bought about culture clashes, and this is something that has been created by Britain's OWN DOING. You can't just blame the immigrants for a problem that you yourself have created. Of course this problem is not something exclusively of a British issue. Europe and the USA have also made the exact same bed as you, so now they will just have to lie in it.

 

[Tony]

Britain = Equality and Diversity. Rights and Respect. All people with equal access to services and equal under the law. The right to choose for oneself what to think and believe. This is what makes us a rich nation beyond monetary boundaries, and why people wish to come here.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Through a mutual friend, I am aquainted with the teenage girl from Ohio who is the daughter of Muslim parents. She chose to convert to Christianity. And now feels threatened that her own parents might seek to have her executed in accordance with this Fatwa.

I don't want to say that this is indeed what her parent's plans are, because we all know that teenagers can over-react. But I know enough of the case from sources beyond the media to know that she really does believe the threat is real.

In Somalia the execution of converts from Islam to Christianity (or any other religion) have been sanctioned by the state itself. Last year, for example, Sunni Muslims in Somalia beheaded Mansuur Mohammed who was a Christian convert. At the time of his beheading Muslims celebrated by chanting Allah Akbar. To my knowledge Mohammed had done nothing treasonous to the state of Somalia, nor even to Islam other than becoming a Christian.

Egyptian authorities have prevented Maher El-Gowhary, a Muslim-born Christian convert, from leaving the country. He was detained at Cairo Airport. His passport confiscated and he was advised that he is barred from traveling on orders from a 'higher authority'.

Maher and his 15-year-old daughter, Dina, who also embraced Christianity, were traveling to China on 17th September 2009, on a two-week holiday.

Ibrahim Habib, chairman of United Copts GB, who spoke with El-Gowhary during his detainment at the airport, said that Maher was treated very badly by airport security, and was told of his travel ban "less than an hour before departure."

Now, fortunately these folks aren't being threatened with execution, but even still the case seems like a form of governmental harassment. They are not being charged with any crime, certainly not treason, unless of course the act of converting is itself seen as treason. And if conversion is equated with treason, then I suggest that there is indeed compulsion in Islamic religion.

 

[Eliphaz]

The problem here is the joining of church and state in Islam. Too often I have heard that treason need not be against the country, but can be against the religion too. If an ex muslim were to become a Christian for example and start preaching salvation through Jesus, many muslims have told me that would be treason and would rightly be punishable by death. That very much alarms me. Especially given that Islam itself is a religion that preaches to outsiders (creating a deadly double standard).

This.

America was founded on the same principle the only difference is everyone is trying to be so politically correct now. The problem with america is we took away religion from state. as soon as we took morals away from schools and government is when america started to go down the tubes...

remember columbine?????

But the difference is Christianity does not have a doctrinal place in government whereas Islam encourages or rather requires (under an Islamic State) government enforcement of religious punishments. Americans are the first to admit America is going to the dogs, but at least no-one is getting harrassed or killed by the state for leaving their religion and so they have a right to freely choose their beliefs.

Now, fortunately these folks aren't being threatened with execution, but even still the case seems like a form of governmental harassment. They are not being charged with any crime, certainly not treason, unless of course the act of converting is itself seen as treason. And if conversion is equated with treason, then I suggest that there is indeed compulsion in Islamic religion.

These stories are of course, isolated incidents, but they do beg the question of whether this sort of thing would escalate and become more common under a proper Islamic State. Or rather, maybe fewer people would admit to it, for they would probably 'keep up appearances' and pretend to be Muslim. Who knows how many people did this in the past.

 

[aamirsaab]

This.



But the difference is Christianity does not have a doctrinal place in government whereas Islam encourages or rather requires (under an Islamic State) government enforcement of religious punishments. Americans are the first to admit America is going to the dogs, but at least no-one is getting harrassed or killed by the state for leaving their religion and so they have a right to freely choose their beliefs.



These stories are of course, isolated incidents, but they do beg the question of whether this sort of thing would escalate and become more common under a proper Islamic State. Or rather, maybe fewer people would admit to it, for they would probably 'keep up appearances' and pretend to be Muslim. Who knows how many people did this in the past.

I dont think you guys fully understand the reason BEHIND the apostacy punishment. So I'll examplify.

Let's say you work for coca-cola. One day you decide to pack up and leave (which you are well within your right to). But then let's say you go blabbing about company secrets or start slandering coca-cola as a company. Now, the head of coca-cola (or the branch you work at) would be well within his legal right to sue you.

It's a similar concept in Islam: you can leave it and join another (again you are well within your human and legal right to), but if you start blabbing our ''secrets'' (which is why originally this law was sent down [I've covered this in the past]) or slandering (and/or attacking our ''employees''), you're ass is going to court. And if found guilty, will receive a punishment.

There's no double standard here: as a muslim or convert to Islam, if you slander any other ''company'' or ''employee'' you can be taken to court!

 

[Chuck]

I think the main reason is, if this law is true as there is dispute over its application, anyhow, if any one wants to become a Muslim he/she has to be serious enough even to risk their life. It was put into place when Muslims were very small community, and it is opposite to what any small religion would do, they probably want to encourage people, yet this law basically would have discouraged most people from becoming a Muslim.

 

[Eliphaz]

I dont think you guys fully understand the reason BEHIND the apostacy punishment. So I'll examplify.

Let's say you work for coca-cola. One day you decide to pack up and leave (which you are well within your right to). But then let's say you go blabbing about company secrets or start slandering coca-cola as a company. Now, the head of coca-cola (or the branch you work at) would be well within his legal right to sue you.

It's a similar concept in Islam: you can leave it and join another (again you are well within your human and legal right to), but if you start blabbing our ''secrets'' (which is why originally this law was sent down [I've covered this in the past]) or slandering (and/or attacking our ''employees''), you're ass is going to court. And if found guilty, will receive a punishment.

There's no double standard here: as a muslim or convert to Islam, if you slander any other ''company'' or ''employee'' you can be taken to court!

This is ridiculous.

How you can compare Coca-Cola to Islam, blabbing company secrets to changing your personal religious beliefs, and being sued or going to jail for a few years to being killed?

(In the case of MI5 spy David Shayler revealing security secrets the maximum sentence he could have gotten was six years, and this is for revealing government secrets, not Coca Cola's!)

People don't understand the reason behind the punishment? Well I think it is laid out quite clearly here:

Narrated 'Abdullah: Allah's Apostle said, "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims."

Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 83, Number 17​

It takes a leap of imagination to call that treason and an even bigger leap of faith to take that as God's will.

 

[Uthman]

http://www.islamicboard.com/clarifications-about-islam/4738-islam-apostasy.html

 

[aadil77]

But the website which posted the fatwa seemed to indicate that one of the problems of Islam was that this WAS NOT being applied across the board and that it should be. I got the distinct impression that they would indeed be more happy with "they'd all be dead" than to allow a person to become an apostate Muslim. And the best I've seen anyone here say is that the ruling isn't always carried out, not that they disagreed with the ruling itself.

just to clarify - thats not a problem with islam

 

[Grace Seeker]

just to clarify - thats not a problem with islam

But you seem to imply that you agree that this is a problem. If not with Islam, then where is the problem located? Certainly I have a problem with the ruling of the fatwa, and I continue to find that no one is willing to say that the fatwa is not an expression of Islamic jurisprudence.

 

[Pygoscelis]

I have to agree, its a rather off the mark comparison.

I can sort of see the treason bit, though its a deadly double standard. But the secrets bit? You muslims have secrets that us non-muslims are not supposed to know about? Never heard of that before.

There's no double standard here: as a muslim or convert to Islam, if you slander any other ''company'' or ''employee'' you can be taken to court!

The double standard is that islam says to kill those who leave it and work against it, and islam also encourages you to do the same thing to other religions.

A Muslim leaves Islam and "accepts jesus as his personal savior, etc", "takes partners with god" and is encouraged by Christianity to spread the faith and try to convert other Muslims to Christianity. This is seen as treason and punishable by death?

A Christian leaves Christianity "and accepts the one true God, Allah and Mohammed as his prophet", "renouncing that Jesus is the path to salvation" and is encouraged by Islam to spread the faith and try to convert other Christians to Islam. Should this also be seen as treason and punishable by death?

 

[aamirsaab]

I have to agree, its a rather off the mark comparison.

I can sort of see the treason bit, though its a deadly double standard. But the secrets bit? You muslims have secrets that us non-muslims are not supposed to know about? Never heard of that before.

Military secrets.

If I join the US army, work my way up and find out all the military tactics and then defect to uzbekistan, I'm a dead man.

The double standard is that islam says to kill those who leave it and work against it, and islam also encourages you to do the same thing to other religions.

No it doesn't! You and eliphaz completely missed the point of my post. Read it again, I'm not explaining myself twice - I made it pretty clear the first time.

A Muslim leaves Islam and "accepts jesus as his personal savior, etc", "takes partners with god" and is encouraged by Christianity to spread the faith and try to convert other Muslims to Christianity. This is seen as treason and punishable by death?

Only if he's causing trouble within the muslim community. Like I don't know, demonising Allah at the same time. Or tactically saying his little speech infront of muslims whilst they gather for the friday prayers.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Military secrets.

If I join the US army, work my way up and find out all the military tactics and then defect to uzbekistan, I'm a dead man.


No it doesn't! You and eliphaz completely missed the point of my post. Read it again, I'm not explaining myself twice - I made it pretty clear the first time.


Only if he's causing trouble within the muslim community. Like I don't know, demonising Allah at the same time. Or tactically saying his little speech infront of muslims whilst they gather for the friday prayers.

The thing is, aamirsaab, that your qualifications which limit the application to the scenarios you've set forth here are not found anywhere in the fatwa. And it seems that there are more than just a few scattered cases where Muslims have set forth to make it a much broader interpretations application to instances that do not include any sharing of military or state secrets, that have nothing to do with stirring trouble up, where people just wish to go quietly on their own way worshipping in their own private way, but no longer in keeping with the tenets of Islam. And because they were once identified as being Muslim, others within the Ummah have deemed them worthy of death for nothing more than converting to another religion. And those who are condoning this are not just a few isolated extremists, but acts sanctioned by government bodies and officials.


So, let me give a specific scenario. Hatice is a young girl from eastern Turkey. She was born to Muslim parents. And raised in a small community that was exclusively Muslim. Her father and brothers regular attend prayers at the local mosque. She has generally prayed at home with her mother, and though as a teenager she became less regular in keeping this practice, she always had a revival of personal devotion every year at Ramadan.

A few years ago, Hatice graduated high school and went off to study at university. She ended up studying in Istanbul, where she was exposed to all manner of different beliefs. Many of her professors were at best nominal Muslims. A few even were so bold to declare themselves as athiests. This led Hatice begin to ask questions about her faith, and even to in time doubt it. She found herself not really believing the Qur'an to be a revealed book. But she was so used to celebrating all of the traditions that she grew up with that she continued to celebrate Ramadan, even as she realized that she didn't believe in the very thing she was celebrating.

After graduation from university, she applied to grad school in London. There she completely quit saying prayers completely. She would dress as here peer group dressed, went to local pubs with them, even engaging in drinking games with the boys that she began to date. One day she woke up and wondered how it was that her life had changes so much from when she was younger. There was one girl that she was interning with that she felt close enough to that she was able to confide her internal conflict. That girl happened to be a buddhist. And this buddhist shared how she didn't believe in God or gods per se, but did find meaning in life from the teachings of the Buddha.

When Hatice returned home, that year, she no longer kept any of the practices of Islam. When asked why not, she said that she didn't believe in Islam or that Muhammed was the prophet. That she had found truth and meaning in the principles of Buddhism which she now kept and that she considered herself no longer a Muslim, but a Buddhist.

Her mother cries. Her father says that she was raised a Muslim and that she is still a Muslim. That she must be crazy, and been brainwashed, for no rationally thinking person would ever leave Islam once they knew the beauty and truth of it. He tries to have her committed to a mental hospital. But Hatice will have nothing of it. She gets into a big fight with her family, and tells them that they are the ones who have deluded themselves. She declares that she is not a Muslim. That she is old enough to make such decisions for herself. She is a Buddhist and she is going to remain a Buddhist. Further, she says that they should all realize what fools they are for believing in a God who doesn't even exist. And since he doesn't exist how could he send an angel with a recitation to anyone. Her brother tells her to shut up or he'll shut her up. They revert to their childish taunts of "make me" and other silly things. But that very night her brother, Ahmet, kills her, and claims it is an honor killing both because his sister had allowed herself to become sexually active, was so with non-Muslim men, and she had claimed to have herself left Islam.

Now my question is what, if anything, should the state do with regard to Ahmet?

Does the answer to that question change any if we move the story from eastern Turkey to Anwar province of Pakistan? Or to London?