Apparently, THIS is why my sister’s friends are putting their lives on the line in Afghanistan:
An Afghan man is being tried in a court in the capital, Kabul, for converting from Islam to Christianity.
Abdul Rahman is charged with rejecting Islam and could face the death sentence under Sharia law unless he recants.
Rahman, who was carrying a bible last month when he was arrested and charged with dissing Islam, has a backstory which is perfect for a Christian martyr, replete with persecution from the most intimate levels:
He converted 16 years ago as an aid worker helping refugees in Pakistan. His estranged family denounced him in a custody dispute over his two children.
Four years after the Taleban was ousted, conservative clerics are still in control of Afghanistan’s judiciary, stymieing Hamid Karzai’s reform-minded government, which would obviously prefer a secular legal branch. Afghanistan’s Sharia-based constitution enables this mess, creating a clusterfuck where Karzai can’t intervene in this case of conservatives v. reformists.
Trial Judge Ansarullah Mawlazezadeh benevolently states:
“We will invite him again because the religion of Islam is one of tolerance. We will ask him if he has changed his mind. If so we will forgive him,”
…and if not, they will kill him.
How tolerant of them. Shame on such narrow-minded hypocrites. Shame on those whose narrow-minded hypocrisy defiles a religion which means “peace”.
It turns out that they don’t just hate Christians (whew! THAT’S a relief):
Several journalists have been prosecuted under blasphemy laws in post-Taleban Afghanistan.
The editor of a women’s rights magazine was convicted of insulting Islam and sentenced to death last year – but was later released after an apology and heavy international pressure.
I don’t want to be the president of Afghanistan right now. Constitutionally castrated, he can’t do a thing as Sharia-mad clerics rush to judge and potentially execute a man whose only crime was choosing a different (and still Abrahamic!) faith.
Observers say executing a converted Christian would be a significant precedent as a conservative interpretation of Sharia law in Afghanistan.
But it would also outrage Western nations which put Mr Karzai in power and are pouring billions of dollars into supporting the country.
You think?
P.S. It would also outrage rational people everywhere, who find this unnecessary and vicious transgression of human rights untenable.
Given what Afghanistan has been through over the last quarter century, is it any wonder that such conditions prevail?
Do American taxpayers know they’re funding a sharia-based constitution in Afghanistan?
Without going too far off-topic, the word “Islam” actually means “submission”, not “peace”. The word for “peace” is “Salaam” — similar, I know, but the different meaning is key, including in the context of the issue this thread is discussing.
(Anna — this isn’t intended as a deliberate nit-picking contradiction of what you wrote).
a couple of weeks back i was listening in on an open-line radio program hosted by cbc’s rex murphy – the topic was is canada taking right approach in afghanistan – one of the guest speakers was malalai joya… take a hear if you get the chance thru the link i’m putting above – i didnt hear mlk’s speech … but joya’s “i want to tell you..” resonated with me much the same way as “i have a dream”… To paraphrase – “i want to tell you… that the taleban is still in control… that the president is powerless… that my life is being threatened because we spoke up… that an eleven year old was assaulted by so called legislators, … that there is a lot to be changed and we need help”. i think it’s at the 1 hr mark… i’ll try to point out the exact point of time when i get the chance tonight – heady stuff. chek it out.
From #4 i have a good memory 🙂 … the whole show is illuminating but skip ahead to 1:03 on this audio link if you just want to lisen to joya
Interesting how in Islamic countries non-Muslim minorities get treated quite differently as compared to Muslim minorities in non-Islamic countries. Perhaps that should change.
Unfortunately, tolerance for apostasy isn’t part of Islam. To suggest otherwise is wishful thinking.
Murdering…excuse me, “executing”…a human being for converting from Islam to something else: has it happened before? What does mainline Islam have to say about it? What does Islam historically have to say about this?
A good argument can be made from certain Hadiths (the sayings of Mohammed) that the punishment for apostasy is death. And it certainly was understood that way historically.
All four schools of Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh) agree that an apostate should be killed. What the Afghans are trying to do, while atrocious, is nothing new, and is nothing that is foreign to Islam.
So, no, we can’t all just get along.
That is striking. Has anyone tried forming a fifth school?
Yea the funny thing is the Old Testament God of the Jews and Christians didn’t tolerate infidels either. But there is something to be said for interpretation and ignoring outdated tenets. However, there is also something to be said about the rigidity of Islamic law; the fact that Muslims are one of the few religions that have a text, the Koran, that it definies as literally from God’s mouth to the Prophet’s ear to paper. So I don’t know where the modern world is going to take Islam or how Islam deals with the problem of its relations with others; but I read an article in the NYT about an Egyptian cleric gaining popularity in trying to do just that; hopefully more will emerge. http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Egypt-Reform-Preacher.html
Vikram, so ur suggesting what exactly?
True, Joe.
But there’s always the option of leaving religious prescriptions behind and making your own way in the world by means of rationality, intuition and experience.
Or would that be too obvious?
I know it is not relevant but would like to know more about this conversion. How much money was he offered by this organization which was there to “aid” people.
I do not think he should be punished for converting even if he did it for money.
Islam is not shy in converting people from other faiths. In other words, Islam expects the right to convert and prosletyse, yet demands that others refrain from prosletysing to Islam. I do feel that it is this kind of tension and dichotomy that causes a lot of the problems between Muslims and the rest of the world these days.
A similar treatment in kind. If they don’t want to to be discriminated against, then perhaps they should not discriminate against others… Fair wouldn’t you say ?
1-2-3-4-5… hrmmmm…
6-7-8-9-10… hm…
No.
Thanks for playing.
Interestingly enough Islam has actively avoided any “enlightenment” movement, and managed to maintain a literal interpretation of the Koran, even 1400 years later. However, a comparison between Pakistan and Afghanistan shows quite a different approach to application of Islam. While Sharia law is mandated in both countries, and both have quite misogynist and backward laws, Pakistan is the more liberal country. The right-wing Muslims have historically, never garnered more than 5% of the popular vote in Pakistan. The case being discussed above would most likely not have occurred in Pakistan. In major urban centers of Pakistan i.e. Karachi, Lahore the sight of women walking around with there hair freely exposed and driving cars is common. Around the 70’s Afghanistan was one of the most modern Islamic countries, where women sported mini skirts and malls were bustling, the rise of the Taliban brought an end to all that.
My argument is this, that if Afghanistan had been left alone, and not been brought in as a pawn between the superpowers, that it being a progressive Islamic country would have continued. I do not believe that it is necessary for Muslim scholars to past edicts which would “modernize” Islam, or the birth of a fifth school is needed. I feel that Muslims in this modern world, if left to their own devices will update there approaches automatically, even though it may be gradual; Turkey is a great example of this. The model left by Christianity in terms of having an enlightenment, may not be a model tha each religon needs to follow. Countries and regions which actively practice the more backward Islamic laws and rules, are those very regions which have been actively affected by America’s neo-imperialistic foreign policies i.e. Iran, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan.
umm….your sister’s friends have no right to be in afghanistan…
If you mean that Muslims living in non Muslim majority countries should in some way be held accountable for what happens to non Muslims in Muslim majority countries then it is not fair at all, in fact it is a dangerous logic of collective responsibility and guilt you are implying. Surely you would not like someone saying that you should be held responsible for the faults of some Hindus in, say Gujarat? Self evidently, it is a quite outrageous question to ask.
DBB writes:>>Interestingly enough Islam has actively avoided any “enlightenment” movement
And it will continue to do so.
“Enlightenment” is just a fancy-shmancy word for separation of religion and politics. Christianity could separate Church and State because it’s Founder never held or wanted to hold political office. Jesus was a sanyasi – He did not desire for anything material, least of all land, power, followers etc. He never held a sword. It’s another thing that later “saints” subverted His teachings and it took the barbarity of Europe’s Dark Ages to make Christians return to sanity.
Islam on the other hand, has a completely different founder. As a consequence, it is impossible to separate religion from politics without destroying the nature of Islam. Hence, Enlightenment is impossible.
M. Nam
Word up, Nam.
I think that this notion that “Islam” literally means “submission” is crucial.
Sharia (living under Islamic law) is the apotheosis of Islam.
It is the religion’s truest form. This is true in a way that wouldn’t be true for Christian jurisprudence- as you’ve pointed out, Jesus had a whole nother kettle of fish cooking.
Strangely enough, equating religion with the law is also true for Judaism. Yes, “render unto Caesar” was truly spoken by a Jewish man, but look where it got him.
even you recognize that it’s not relevant, so why bring this unnecessarily incendiary point up? couldn’t resist that pointed dig, eh?
“My argument is this, that if Afghanistan had been left alone, and not been brought in as a pawn between the superpowers, that it being a progressive Islamic country would have continued…. I feel that Muslims in this modern world, if left to their own devices will update there approaches automatically, even though it may be gradual; Turkey is a great example of this.”
I don’t have an opinion on whether a Muslim country, if left to its own devices, would be more likely to update its traditional approaches than one which has been interfered with – the point seems debatable, and I can’t seem to think of one that has never been interfered with – broadly speaking. But I disagree that Turkey is a prime example of a country modernizing of its own volition – we are talking about a country that is doing much to please its neighbors for that coveted EU membership. So, while there may not be outright interference w/ sovereignty in Turkey’s case, as was the case w/ Afghanistan, it is still a Muslim country going through many changes directly due to Western influence/interference.
passing through,
I see merit in your argument. However, first I do not think any country can exist in void without external push and pulls – not even Tibet could.
Turkey is a special case. A lot to do with its geopgraphy and Kemal Atutark. Even then, it has its own unique set of problems.
Eh.. whatever. Perhaps you can invert that count into a countdown for a liftoff to Uranus… 😉
Funny how that same Muslim minority does not hesitate in protesting and leading marches against Western sanctions and military actions against Muslim countries, with whom they have no connection with in reality except for sharing the same faith. So they do feel a responsibility to their own cultures when they feel they are being persecuted, but obviously not when they do the persecution to others in their homelands. Then they are “not responsible” for the actions in their homelands ? Most peculiar if you ask me…
MNaam – let’s unpack that a bit. The separation of Church and State is an outworking of some of the deeper paradigm shifts that came with the Enlightenment. I don’t know about you but I find the Euro/Islamic comparison very sloppy – I can’t stand it when the media talking heads go on about, “oh, when will Islam have it’s Reformation/when will Islam find its Martin Luther?” What an incredibly Eurocentric way to view Islamic history. I mean let’s face it – how much of a renaissance/reformation would there have been in Europe without access to the texts that Islamic scholars preserved over the centuries.
Al Jibraiq – we’ll agree to disagree. I lived under Sharia law for many years and I have to say in all honesty, at least in how it is practiced today, that it’s hardly the apotheosis of the great Islamic tradition.
Do you feel personally guilty for the crimes of Hindu extremists? Most peculiar indeed….
No I don’t, and neither do I join in protests against every perceived wrong against Hindus either…
Here is another example of how non Muslims are treated even in a “progressive” Muslim country like Malaysia :
Good point. However, Turkeys “progressive” laws and approach to Islam, predates its attempt to join the EU. I belive the best example, is the comparison of Pakistan and Afghanistan. Both are neighbours, and granted both have been interfered with, but there is a marked differnce in the level of intereference, and as such a decidently stark difference in how Islam has manifested itself in both countries. Attempts at a Taliban style government has been attempted in Pakistan since its founding, but has never succedded. I do not think this is by accident.
So you hold all Muslims in non Muslim countries responsible for the actions of Muslims elsewhere despite understanding the principle that you as a Hindu are not to blame for the violence of Hindu extremists or their apologists elsewhere? A mullah organising a crowd of people to protest against something in another country rolls out for you as ALL Muslims being collectively responsible, whilst you absolve yourself of blame for the crimes of Hindu extremists? So why are individual Muslims not accorded the same ‘rights of innocence’ that you claim for yourself?
It is fascinating to watch your logic and peculiar morality work itself out here. Carry on.
This is a piece of comedy. Vikram says:
And then in the next breath writes and cuts and pastes:
You’re a piece of work my friend! Carry on with your hatred, I cannot be bothered to debate with a brick wall, it is like trying to tell a skunk about his bad smell.
Kush Tandon,
You are right in pointing out geography and Atutarak. But w/r/t outside influences, my point was that a lot of the human rights, rule of law, etc. reforms that Turkey is gearing towards currently (a lot of which is what will truly distinguish Turkey from other Muslim countries in the modern world) are directly a result of European/Western influence, or in the case of EU membership, demands (not that that’s a bad thing!).
Vikram,
I understand the point you’re trying to make, but to use a cliche, two wrongs don’t make a right. And “an eye for an eye/tit for tat” is not the correct way to go about things. If the other party is using unethical methods, one doesn’t have to resort to the same unethical methods in order to “retaliate”. One has to keep the moral high ground and stick to one’s ideals & principles, regardless of whatever the other party is doing. Certainly if one wishes to maintain any kind of moral credibility or claim moral authority in a particular situation.
Vikram, consider that the self-critical eye required for Muslims to do what you want them to do -that is protest and denounce the excesses of fundamentalist forces in the greater Islamic world- itself requires Muslims to not feel marginalized and ‘oppressed’ because of their religious identity. The vocabulary and tactics you use to prosecute Muslims is the kind of talk the drowns out the dialogue that needs to go on within Islam on how to embrace the modern world as responsible global citizens.
As a consequence, it is impossible to separate religion from politics without destroying the nature of Islam. Hence, Enlightenment is impossible.
no, religious people can make up anything and call it True 🙂
let me give you an example: a west african muslim potentate was making a lot of money from enslaving kufirs. pretty soon, he ran out of non-muslim subjects he could export. what did he do? he had a religious ruling that declared anyone who disobeyed him guilty of apostacy. then he demanded impossible tax levies from particular villages. when those villages couldn’t pay up (he knew they didn’t have the resources to pay) he declared them guilty of apostacy for disobeying him, and presto, he had them enslaved as kufirs.
don’t ever underestimate the ingenuity of the godly 🙂
Looks like you are unable to get the point clearly. So let me make this really easy for you: In both the case of the Taleban and the Malaysian government and the Saudi government, it is state sponsored discrimation against minorities. Just as much as Muslims hold American citizens responsible for what the US government does, why don’t we hold them responsible when Islamic governments sponsor state discrimination. There is a vast difference between “A mullah organising a crowd of people” (sic) and state sponsored discrimination against minorities. The Hindu fanatics (for the most part) are not state sponsored (I’m sure some will debate that). The question I am raising is why is there this double standard with regards to Islamic governments ? Muslims turns a blind eye when their home governments sponsor discrimination yet want the benefit of every Western anti-discrimination protection when living in Western countries.
ust as much as Muslims hold American citizens responsible for what the US government does, why don’t we hold them responsible when Islamic governments sponsor state discrimination.
muslism aren’t like citizens of western states. you might as well expect a dog to do algebra and throw a fit when he can’t spit out the quadratic equation.
though i agree that unlike a dog citizens of muslim countries have potential. but, you can’t just pretend that they are like other groups, if you are raised by wolves you have an urge to hunt when the lame deer comes into view.
Just as much as Muslims hold American citizens responsible for what the US government does, why don’t we hold them responsible when Islamic governments sponsor state discrimination.
Generally those governments are not elected. Many groups play the “oppressed minority in the West,” and “fervent nationalists at home” game. But frankly, unless they are breaking American laws or engaging in illicit transnational activity, then we have to give minorities the benefit of the doubt, I would say.
you might as well expect a dog to do algebra and throw a fit when he can’t spit out the quadratic equation.
dogz r cool. why you gotta be dissing on the dogs 24/7?
eddie, katz rule 🙂
you might as well expect a dog to do algebra
Oi, don’t knock algebraic equations.
🙂
au contraire, i love algebra. i just give a dog his due….
“Good point. However, Turkeys “progressive” laws and approach to Islam, predates its attempt to join the EU.”
Not really. Turkey may have been progressive at a time – but currently, it is truly facing a struggle in meeting Western standards of “progressive”. Once again, it’s membership negotiations w/ the EU is demonstrative.
“I belive the best example, is the comparison of Pakistan and Afghanistan….”
I’m not sure that Pakistan is actually a model progressive Muslim state, though it may not be the worst out there. I would actually point to some of the less flashy Middle Eastern oil states – UAE and Kuwait are prime examples of progressive Muslim states, though it is rare that we really hear much about them. Yet, in spite of their progressive status, the two do appear to be states w/ considerable Western influence; that is consdierable Western economic influence, though not outright occupation. Which brings us to the Q of what exactly do we mean by “interference/influence” – are we talking purely military or also economic? Ultimately, I stick to my first position – the point is debatable, but there are a lot of holes in the assertion of a direct relationship.
I agree with Jay Singh, we should discuss this specific incidence instead of generalizing into an all Muslim accountability. Surely Muslims in Turkey(Turks: The Bad Part) and Azerbaijan have nothing to do with such an extreme act.
Eddie, I do not agree with holding Muslims across the world accountable for Muslims in other nations, as Nationalism takes precedence here over religion (Islam is not a monolith nor is it united in its thought). If you said Afghanis should be held accountable for what is going on Afghanistan, I would agree. However, to what degree the Afghanis in Afghanistan today have any say in such a matter is a serious question. Has the coalition, as the democracy-granting institution, truly delivered? yet?
Nevertheless, it is sad that such an incidence has occured.
Some time back there was a documentory on PBS about a guy from Brooklyn who was buying guns in the US and supporting the Kosovo liberation Army. The link : Kosovo: A Brooklyn connection This group was predominantly muslim, but you wouldnt recognize from their dances and general behaviour that we dont associate with an islamic group. I was fascinated by that aspect of it. They were so much like their Christian Yugoslavian (former Yugoslavia) brothers in every way.
don’t ever underestimate the ingenuity of the godly 🙂
Sweet!
Dirty Brown Boi – # 16.
I say this with utmost respect. Your contention that Pakistan affords more latitude when applying the reprehensible “hudood” ordinance couldn’t be farther from reality.
Under this law, Pakistan has managed to condemn a 14 year old christian boy, Masih, to death by stoning. His crime – writing “blasphemous” coments on a mosque wall. Following international outrage the sentnce was commuyed to time in prison.
Under this law, A prominent medical college professor was condemned to death in peshawar, when he replied a student’s query, “did the prophet [pbuh] shave his pubic and under arm hair[as proscribed by the koran] when he was in his twenties? with the reasonable answer -“no, probably not. since Islam was not revealed to the prophet [pbuh] until later in his life”
The fun part is that it was the students who reported him to the authorities [civil authorities arrested him] and demanded his execution.
Once again his sentence, following international attention, was commuted to jail time.
Imagine the plight of those poor souls whose cases do not get attention from the new york times.
btw, the above incidents occured within the last six years or so and both can be googled.
Eddie:
Yeah.. I keep meaning to research all the original hadiths & the life & times of you-know-who, but it is so f***ing tedious and boring. These godlies love verbose verbiage.
the shia might be considered a ‘fifth’ school.
wow, some posters are so reminescent of conversations i have had with some very good old boy southern law enforces .. um, in the south…
i know most, if not almost all of us here and many other places are aware of, but, seemingly, a few, just a few, are not completely aware of this:
just like there is no such country as canadia, there is no such state as Islam, or, Muslim, or, to the completely stoopid, Muhammadan (i actually read this somewhere not more than 23 days ago).
there is no central governing body like the vatican, or no central language admin like the academie francais, nor, as it happens, is there for the most part, complete agreement as to what the qu’ran says (mark the spelling, people dont agree on this either), nor, when the new moon appears before the 2 eids.
having lived and travelled in predominant muslim countries in mideast, south/southeast asia, africa, as well as communities in the US and Europe, i have yet to meet a room full of muslims that agree on anything, other than the 5 pillars. even the same people over their life times dont hold to the exact same beliefs in islam, other than 5 pillars.
whereas, there is such a state as, well, The United States of America, where citizens vote (or pretend to, or almost vote on) their government, and their legislative body who enact law. so, comparing a state, and a religion, and holding the citizens of a state who choose their gov/legislative bodies, and, a religion where atleast in my experience, no one agrees on many things, not even within sects, forget about between sects, is the most asinine thing i have ever heard of.. again.. since the last time someone said it. but they was ignorant.
so, to hold the rest of the peace loving, submitting, law abiding, non-demonstrating, mtv watching, coke drinking, jeans wearing, hair dying, gov. criticising, and most of all, freedom loving minders-of-own-business and keeping outta others thang, accountable… well, no need to say, as posters have mentioned earlier, brickwalls dont hear much…
(back to psc101/his101 for yer)
similar discussion going on here:
http://muttawa.blogspot.com/
brilliant site, if u havent heard it. good place to get some non-s.a. perspective