Top Muslim clerics: Convert must die

[Gan]

KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) -- Senior Muslim clerics are demanding that an Afghan man on trial for converting from Islam to Christianity be executed, warning that if the government caves in to Western pressure and frees him, they will incite people to "pull him into pieces."

The rest of the story:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/03/23/afghan.christian.ap/index.html

__________________________________________________ _______________

And they call us (Westerners) barbarians.

Seriously, its not like he decided to go postal and kill a bunch of people or anything else where a punishment of death would remove the threat from civilization.

The man only wants to change religion. Is that why Islam can boast over 2 billion followers? Because they're stuck there under the threat of death if they leave?!?! I mean, the (some) Baptists (and some Catholics) only threaten you with eternal damnation if you dont follow their path.

When will these guys step up to the plate? They're clearly an older civilization and yet the West covered this concept when we left jolly old England back in the 18th Century.

Its good that things like this are finally getting coverage for the world community to judge.

[Warriorbird]

Seriously, its not like he decided to go postal and kill a bunch of people or anything else where a punishment of death would remove the threat from civilization.

Funny in an Iraq context. Really funny.

[Gan]

Too bad this story is based in Afghanastan... otherwise you're post would have something to do with this story.


Thanks for the input though.

[Skirmisher]

Too bad this story is based in Afghanastan... otherwise you're post would have something to do with this story.


Thanks for the input though.

But your initial post did not restrict things to Afghanistan and instead wondered about Islam around the world when you asked this.



Is that why Islam can boast over 2 billion followers?

As I doubt you were saying that Afghanistan had two billion followers of Islam within its borders.

[Warriorbird]

Hmm. Yeah, I was kind of wondering that sort of thing, Skirm. But if you want Afghanistan-centric stuff...

this the same Afghanistan that we let return to being the top heroin producing country in the world after the Taliban shut that down? Yeah, yeah I think it is. We've enabled all sorts of things like this there.

[Landrion]

Hmm. Yeah, I was kind of wondering that sort of thing, Skirm. But if you want Afghanistan-centric stuff...

this the same Afghanistan that we let return to being the top heroin producing country in the world after the Taliban shut that down? Yeah, yeah I think it is. We've enabled all sorts of things like this there.

Now thats just classic. Some religious figures threaten to tear a man to pieces for converting from his religion and we "enabled" it by toppling the Taliban.

Well, lets just continue the blame game. I blame whatever god you care to recognize for creating man in the first place. Without that there would have been no Afghanistan, no Taliban, no US invasion and no US and no religion to convert from (HAHA).

Wasnt Afghanistan was an opium producer?

[Drew]

Wasnt Afghanistan was an opium producer?



They were before the Taliban came to power. The Taliban brutally repressed it. Warriorbird recommends that we summarily execute any poppy farmer we find like the Taliban did.

[Warriorbird]

Or, alternately, admit the lie that is the drug war...

[Landrion]

Or, alternately, admit the lie that is the drug war...

Happily, but what has the drug war to do with Muslim clerics threatening to tear apart a man for coverting to Christianity?

Nothing.

Threatening a man's life over conversion to a religion is a base and disgusting practice. Trying to insinuate that we enabled it by toppling a barbaric sadistic regime is a weak blame-game at best.

[Gan]

I guess it was a mistake to try to post something such as this and elicit topical debate without someone attempting to derail into their own agenda/topic.

Thanks for keeping it consistent WB.

Nevermind, I'll engage others who might be interested in discussing the fact that a major religion who has been labeled as intolerant, brutal, and aggressive is living up to its true colors.

I suppose there'd be more activity/bashing if Islam/Muslim were replaced with Baptist/Christianity in this story... go Pat Robertson go.

Organized religion of any sort needs a reality check.

[Skirmisher]

Happily, but what has the drug war to do with Muslim clerics threatening to tear apart a man for coverting to Christianity?

Nothing.

Threatening a man's life over conversion to a religion is a base and disgusting practice. Trying to insinuate that we enabled it by toppling a barbaric sadistic regime is a weak blame-game at best.

I'd agree with that pretty much.

I hold Bush responsible for a great many wrongs but this just is not one of them.

The thing enabling this in my opinion is the wave of radical Islamic clerics pressing vehemently, the same clerics whose networks are enabling these violent protests/riots regarding that stupid Danish cartoon.

Moderate Islamics need to make their voices heard and soon as they are allowing these radicals to erode long standing support and or tolerance they had, even in much more liberal western countries than the US.

[Warriorbird]

"I guess it was a mistake to try to post something such as this and elicit topical debate without someone attempting to derail into their own agenda/topic."

Funny. Seemed a lot like yours. You empower some of the dumbest sort of organized religion every day that Bush is in power, Ganalon.

If you don't recognize the role we had in enabling the Northern Alliance to do stuff like this, you're a lot more naive than I thought, Landrion. They're fueled by the drug trade...by far their biggest export.

[Gan]

Funny. Seemed a lot like yours. You empower some of the dumbest sort of organized religion every day that Bush is in power, Ganalon.

Its ok to admit if you have nothing to add to the topic at hand. I know you're not omnicient, and others do as well, so hiding behind derailing posts and attempting to sound witty does you no good.

If you wish to talk about Bush and his role as head of the Republican party and their ties to organized religion - perhaps you could start a thread on it.

[Warriorbird]

You could just start an "Islam is all evil" topic for yourself then. I mean...way to make room for discussion.

[Landrion]

"I guess it was a mistake to try to post something such as this and elicit topical debate without someone attempting to derail into their own agenda/topic."

Funny. Seemed a lot like yours. You empower some of the dumbest sort of organized religion every day that Bush is in power, Ganalon.

If you don't recognize the role we had in enabling the Northern Alliance to do stuff like this, you're a lot more naive than I thought, Landrion. They're fueled by the drug trade...by far their biggest export.

Again, the point Im trying to make to you is that the blame game leads nowhere. Those clerics are making their own decision to act in a reprehensible way. You say to me that Im naive for thinking that they are accountable for their own actions because they make money from a drug trade that is illegal in this country? Im sorry, you can blame their mothers for bearing them, you can blame the US for toppling the Taliban, you can blame anyone you want, it doesnt change the fact that people are responsible for their own actions.

Further, I agree with Ganalon. Its just a derailing tactic. Derailing into a subject we have god-knows enough threads for.

[Warriorbird]

So...what exactly is the subject? Other than the quoted stuff...about all Ganalon has said is, "Islam is bad." I think HE's better than that, he's just choosing not to be.

It reminds me of something else that's bubbling around the Internet these days...the woman whose husband said the words of an Islamic divorce to her while sleeping. For some reason this caused a huge outcry, as the local religious authorities said she'd have to wait 100 days, sleep with another man, and be divorced from him before she could remarry the man who accidentally divorced her (how this was witnessed, I'll never know).

A reasonably literate Islamic religion scholar pointed out that this pronouncement was completely invalid due to a clause requiring the person doing a divorce to not be intoxicated...sleep being a state of intoxication.

The whole "death to the convert" thing is similar. Just because someone does one horrible thing in the name of a religion doesn't make an entire religion evil or even ineffective. Otherwise Christianity would be damned for all the historical violence or things like the situation in former Yugoslavia, Northern Ireland, or abortion clinic bombings.

[DeV]

The whole "death to the convert" thing is similar. Just because someone does one horrible thing in the name of a religion doesn't make an entire religion evil or even ineffective. Otherwise Christianity would be damned for all the historical violence or things like the situation in former Yugoslavia, Northern Ireland, or abortion clinic bombings.Agreed.
Many religions/denominations declare this and that to be a mortal sin based on a particular intepretation of the teachings found in the bible. Islam is no different. I think we can all agree that the threat of death for converting from Islam to Christianity is not the same in Afghanistan as it is for more developed nations. That threat would not be a question here. Ultimately, however beautiful in concept organized religion may appear to be the fact remains that it isn't entirely meant to represent the best of humanity and Islam is just one of many great examples depicting that reality.

[Landrion]

So...what exactly is the subject? Other than the quoted stuff...about all Ganalon has said is, "Islam is bad." I think HE's better than that, he's just choosing not to be.

It reminds me of something else that's bubbling around the Internet these days...the woman whose husband said the words of an Islamic divorce to her while sleeping. For some reason this caused a huge outcry, as the local religious authorities said she'd have to wait 100 days, sleep with another man, and be divorced from him before she could remarry the man who accidentally divorced her (how this was witnessed, I'll never know).

A reasonably literate Islamic religion scholar pointed out that this pronouncement was completely invalid due to a clause requiring the person doing a divorce to not be intoxicated...sleep being a state of intoxication.

The whole "death to the convert" thing is similar. Just because someone does one horrible thing in the name of a religion doesn't make an entire religion evil or even ineffective. Otherwise Christianity would be damned for all the historical violence or things like the situation in former Yugoslavia, Northern Ireland, or abortion clinic bombings.

Now that track I dont have a problem with. If you want to take the position that these clerics arent representative of the religion and the religion doesnt tarnish for their misuse I dont dispute it.

[Gan]

The intent of this thread, before WB decided to go off onto a tangent, was to highlight the stupidity of wanting someone dead for wishing to change their religion.

The focus of stupidity being that we are in the 21st century where mankind as a civilization (not a nationality or religion) should be above exterminating one another over religion.

Additionally I also made note that it was a good thing that acts of the clerics, as represented by the article, were finally getting a spot on the world stage (press) and that the world community (civilization) would have an opportunity to judge rather than have it buried in the sand as it has been for the last ... ~1000 years.

It was never my point to say that Islam is bad, and if you got from my previous posts, then you've got something on your glasses interfering with your vision.

With regards to the actions of a few representing a religion on the whole, I only apply that standard if and only if others in that same religion refused to demonstrate otherwise and make their voice be heard by the world community who would sit in judgement.

Jim Baker, Pat Robertson, or any other prominent Baptist theologen do not represent all Baptists. Louis Farrakhan does not represent all of Islam... or all of the nation of islam if you get down to it.

The only case where that (my) idea might be considered otherwise would be the Pope and Catholocism, but thats only because of my ignorance of the Catholic religion and its practice. Feel free to correct me if otherwise.

[Artha]

The focus of stupidity being that we are in the 21st century
We are. Places like Afghanistan haven't quite caught up yet.

[Daniel]

His case was dismissed.

[Kranar]

<< The intent of this thread, before WB decided to go off onto a tangent, was to highlight the stupidity of wanting someone dead for wishing to change their religion. >>

You said you wanted an intellectual debate... and yet the focus of your debate is that murdering someone for converting to another religion is bad?

I guess I just don't understand what it is you wish to debate or what you thought was the controversial issue worth debating about.

Sometimes debates aren't about being right or wrong. Infact I'd say most debates of value are about what can be learned when a subject is presented in the form of a debate where two or more people can strongly support a stance (even if they don't personally believe that stance). But I mean, that requires that the topic of the debate be complex enough to be controversial.

Judging a country that has been in a state of some of the worst oppression ever recorded in human history and that is still in a constant state of warfare as having a legal system that is highly undeveloped, I mean, sure... it's good you managed to judge them that way, but I really don't see what insight or of what intellectual value such a judgement on them has.

In other news, someone got murdered the other day... debate whether or not the murderer is bad. Please stay on topic.

[Ebondale]

Murder is bad, mmmkay.

[Gan]

You said you wanted an intellectual debate... and yet the focus of your debate is that murdering someone for converting to another religion is bad?

Yes, that is my focus in its entirety, not whether or not I support Bush, or any other post of WB's in this thread up until his very last.



I guess I just don't understand what it is you wish to debate or what you thought was the controversial issue worth debating about.

See previous post.



Sometimes debates aren't about being right or wrong. Infact I'd say most debates of value are about what can be learned when a subject is presented in the form of a debate where two or more people can strongly support a stance (even if they don't personally believe that stance). But I mean, that requires that the topic of the debate be complex enough to be controversial.

Perhaps not complex, but compelling enough for people to have an opinion one way or the other.



Judging a country that has been in a state of some of the worst oppression ever recorded in human history and that is still in a constant state of warfare as having a legal system that is highly undeveloped, I mean, sure... it's good you managed to judge them that way, but I really don't see what insight or of what intellectual value such a judgement on them has.

Actually, my opinion was that its sad that we're in such an advanced age and yet some people, in leadership positions no less, still believe in things such as killing someone for their religious beliefs. And my other opinion was that it is good that things such as this are now getting worldly attention for the rest of human kind to judge, as it should.



In other news, someone got murdered the other day... debate whether or not the murderer is bad. Please stay on topic.

Was said murder comitted under religous persecution? If not, perhaps another thread might be warranted...

[Gan]

His case was dismissed.

Thanks to the Afghan govt. They were said to have been looking for an excuse to dismiss the charges and set the man free, seems like they found it.

[Daniel]

I was at a press conference that the Afghan Foreign minister in DC held the other day and I wish I could go AH HA to the douche bag that decided to go off on a tangent about how barbaric and uncivilzied the Afghan government is. Or better yet, punch him in the face.

[Kranar]

And my other opinion was that it is good that things such as this are now getting worldly attention for the rest of human kind to judge, as it should.


I would say there's far too much judging in this world, and far too few results.

The media, and human beings in general, are excellent when it comes to looking at very simple and basic scenarios, judging them and then patting ourselves on the back for the judgements we pass on others. That's never been the problem. The problem that even the so called "highly civilized people" have is in finding solutions to the problems they were so quick to judge in the first place.

As far as Afghanistan is concerned, what that country needs is more incidents like this to happen. And the next time it happens, the solution shouldn't just be that the guy was mentally ill and to dismiss it on a technicality. The next time it happens it should become a major controversy that is dealt with head-on as the people of Afghanistan define what it means to be a nation that balances a democracy with its religious principles, and perhaps whether such a balance can even exist.

That will do Afghanistan a heck of a lot more good than some newspapers or T.V. shows passing judgement on a nation that's seriously struggling for some sense of stability and security.

[xtc]

I am sure Islam's preferential tax strategy had something to do with some early converts.

The Lord’s Army in Uganda gladly kills Muslims it encounters (I know I have met some members of The Lord’s Army). That doesn’t mean all Christians that have converted have done so under threat of death.

In a small minority of Muslim countries, converts can be faced with death. It is the law. (For the most part most Muslims I have encountered don’t share this view). I don’t agree with it but it is their nation and their law. If you respect democracy (as Bush claims) then you have to respect their law and their choices.

What I want to know is what Christian fanatics converted this poor mentally disabled man and put his life at risk?

BTW The Afghan courts have decided he isn’t mentally fit to stand trial so he won’t be executed by the courts.