Teenage girl, convert to Christianity from Islam, fears for her life...in Florida

Re-posting the original comments thread for this article, as preserved by me, Dumbledoresarmy. First part.

GREEKAMERICAN said - This will only get worse as we allow more refugees in from Muslim countries; a total clash of cultures. They cannot get along with each other so little wonder they won't with us. The Christian Monitor has a whole article about refugees in America.

VIRGIL said - I would encourage all Christians here to pray for this young girl, that she not suffer any harm for her faith in Christ. I would also encourage all Christians to pray for her family, that the love of Christ illuminate their hearts and minds and free them from the spiritual bondage that is Islam.

-MRSJ said - I've already been down on my knees, Virgil (and that's not easy at my age!). I hope and pray that the Lord will keep her safe and help her grow in her new-found faith.

ALARMED PIG FARMER said - (quoting Mr Spencer) 'And how many more such cases are we going to see in America before we say that enough is enough, and call upon Muslims in the U.S. to repudiate and teach against Islam's traditional apostasy law...'

What's really necessary is that all Moslems in America renounce Islam in total.

*** 9:53 ***

All immigrant Moslems who swore allegiance to the Constituion in their citizenship ceremony are by self-definition apostates, and are to be beheaded. And that includes Prez Obama.

*** 33:36 ***

Prefrable using using a butter knife."

End of first part of my record of the comments for this article.

Second part of my copy of the original comments for this article, as made on IntenseDebate. This includes a long and very revealing exchange with a Mohammedan troll.

MUZZAMMIL said -(quoting) 'If she is sent back to her family, she could be killed, in accord with the death penalty that is prescribed by all Muslim sects and schools for those who leave Islam'

Not true. Spencer is, as usual, lying. According to the Hanafi school (which has the largest Muslim following), a woman apostate is not killed because the Prophet forbade killing women.

Thus even according to the classical law, there is disagreement, as opposed to Spencer's ascription of this law to "all Muslim sects and schools".

-BASEBALLMAVEN replied - so, muzzammil, how do you explain all the honor killings??? there are fatwas against people who leave Islam. I know a girl from Egypt who was killed by her family just before she left to study medicine in Europe, because they found out she became a Christian, even though, knowing of the danger, our pastor suggested she not tell her parents 'til she was out of Egypt.

you lie muzzammil

-HESPERADO replied - (quoting) "According to the Hanafi school (which has the largest Muslim following), a woman apostate is not killed because the Prophet forbade killing women."

You have 3 claims there. It should be easy for you to verify each one. Please provide credible links to verify your 3 claims --

1) the Hanafi school has the largest Muslim following

2) women apostates are never killed

3) Mohammed forbade killing women.

-MUZZAMMIL replied - The Hanafi school is predominant in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Central Asia, Afghanistan, China - which alone constitutes almost 600 million Muslims - add to this the smaller proportions in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Bosnia, Albania and many others, approximately half of the Muslim population today follow the Hanafi school of fiqh. The Hanafi school was also adopted by the Abbasids and the Turks, and was thus state rule for most of Islamic history.

As for the apostasy law, see for example book Freedom of Religion, apostasy in Islam by Hassan Saeed p. 52, which references Sarkhasi's mabsut a classical book on Hanafi fiqh to show women are not killed for apostasy according to the Hanafi school. If you can read Arabic, you can access classical Hanafi works at http://feqh.al-islam.com/

The hadiths on the subject are clear:

Sahih Bukhari:

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 258:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar:

During some of the Ghazawat of Allah's Apostle a woman was found killed, so Allah's Apostle forbade the killing of women and children.

Sahih Muslim:

Book 019, Number 4320:
It is narrated by Ibn 'Umar that a woman was found killed in one of these battles; so the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) forbade the killing of women and children.

And according to the Qur'an: "Fight those who fight you and do not transgress" (2:190).

-HESPERADO told MUZZAMMIL - The hadiths you adduce do not prove your claim. Their context shows that they are about killing women in general in time of war, not killing them for the specific penalty of apostasy.

As for Koran 2:190, that is easily dispensed with: apostasy is precisely a "transgression".

Freedom of Religion, apostasy in Islam by Hassan Saeed p. 52, which references Sarkhasi's mabsut a classical book on Hanafi fiqh to show women are not killed for apostasy according to the Hanafi school. If you can read Arabic, you can access classical Hanafi works at http://feqh.al-islam.com/ ..."

Not good enough. If Hanafi really represents all those millions of Muslims throughout the world, there should be clear evidence available on-line that proves your claim. The fact that apparently there isn't, and you have to send me to obscure references I can't easily find, makes your claims suspect.

-MRSJ asked MUZZAMMIL - So why did your namesake kill his wife?

http://tv.popcrunch.com/category/muzzammil-hassan...

-HESPERADO told MUZZAMMIL - I just found this piece of info:

In the Hanafi school, a male apostate is given three days to repent before execution; a female is imprisoned and beaten until she repents.

Two conclusions we civilized Infidels would draw from this:

1) Even if this implies that the female is not put to death for apostasy, being imprisoned and beaten is also not tolerable and reflects a culture and psychology of fanaticism which does not belong in the free world, and those supporting it should not be allowed to live in the West

2) the above description does not, in fact, imply that the female apostate escapes the punishment of death -- for it stipulates that she is "imprisoned and beaten until she repents -- which means either of two things for all females who refuse to "repent":

a) they will remain in prison and beaten for their entire life (even more barbaric than simply imprisonment and beating for a limited period of time)

or

b) at some point they will be killed when they do not repent -- granted by the mercy of the Islamic qadi a longer period than the 3 days for males, but still in the end killed.

Conclusion:

Any way you slice it, the Hanafi school reflects a dangerous fanaticism whose adherents should be forbidden from living in the West.

http://law.jrank.org/pages/668/Comparative-Crimin...

-MUZZAMMIL said - I do not deny this is the classical law. To see a modern understanding, see: http://lamppostproductions.com/files/articles/PRE...

which takes into account the milieu in which these laws were formulated and reveals the actual motivation for the law was not preservation of religion per se but preservation of political integrity and fear of treason (hence why the Prophet didn't kill apostates - despite their existence, why he added the clause "and they depart the community" and why Hanafis can exclude women from the rule).

Any way you slice it, Spencer was lying when he wrote "the death penalty ...is prescribed by all Muslim sects and schools for those who leave Islam" especially when it is in the context of a woman.

-HESPERADO told MUZZAMMIL - "To see a modern understanding, see: http://lamppostproductions.com/files/articles/PRE... "

What muzzamil means here is:

"To see the modern spin written by one Muslim guy out of all those 600 millions of Muslims around the world who for some reason do not choose to write anything repudiating the "classical" view, see..."

-IMNODHIMMI said - (quoting) ".........the Prophet forbade killing women."

Thanks, muzzammil. That's the best laugh I've had all day!

-DUMBLEDORESARMY said - Yes. The ghost of Asma bint Marwan says Muzzammil is a dirty rotten LIAR.

-JOCKAIRA told MUZZAMMIL - As noted by Dumbledoresarmy, Muhammed ordered the killing in the dark of night of the hanifa Asma bint Marwan, a woman with five children, one of them suckling at her breast while her body was slashed open by her assailant who had been specifically charged by Muhammed, and later thanked in public.

Muhammed also ordered the killing of the laughing woman during the massacre of Banu Qurayza where about 900 Jewish men and one laughing Jewish woman were killed. All the beheaded bodies were consigned to trench graves dug by the victims.

It doesn't matter which Islam you choose to follow, the example of Muhammed is held in the highest regard by all and expected to be followed by all devout Muslims. Perhaps the Prophet forbade woman-killing only for others and reserved that particular pleasure for himself. In that case, he was a hypocrite.

To say that Islam proscribes the killing of women, is simply a lie, better known as taqqiyya.

-SUSANP told MUZZAMMIL - "So muhammad "forbade" killing women?!

You're a liar.

What about the old woman he ordered killed for insulting him? He killed women when he and his maniacal army of demented savages attacked defenseless villages. They killed innocent men, women, and children and stole their possessions.

He was a beast; islam is an abomination; and you know damn well that the penalty for apostasy in islam is DEATH.

But you would lie just like that sleazy, filthy imam lied and allow this innocent child to be butchered by her own family.

You probably hope they send her back to her fanatical muslim parents so they can suffocate her in her bed or stab her numerous times while one holds her down. Or better yet, maybe they will get a younger sibling to do the dirty work while they watch the life snuffed out of their own flesh and blood.

You vampires just can't resist a sacrificial blood fest, can you?"

End of second part of original comments thread for this article.

Third and final part of original comments thread for this article.

KNOWYOURRIGHTS said - Why is this not on CNN?

HESPERADO said - (quoting Spencer's editorial remark)'...and call upon Muslims in the U.S. to repudiate and teach against Islam's traditional apostasy law, or face stiff penalties up to and including deportation..."

How would this work? Let's say by the time the U.S. is even ready to begin implementing Spencer's advice here, some 25 years from now, there will be at least 5 million Muslim in the U.S.

Is the U.S. going to call upon all 5 million to "repudiate and teach against" the death penalty for apostasy? If so, let's take the "repudiation" part first: how would that be implemented? Would we require all 5 million report to some government office in their region to sign a form that stipulates such a repudiation? Or could they just repudiate on-line, at repudiate-ridda-hadd/depofjustice.gov? The bureaucratic red-tape nightmare is easy to imagine, involving also the problem of enforcement -- what do we do when Muslims do not report to the office in time or do not register online in time, etc. This is not to mention the flimsiness of verification and trust that would afflict the whole enterprise: would the fact that Muslims simply sign a form mean that we can trust them? This of course applies to any and all stipulations we would require of them -- not merely repudiation on the apostasy issue, but also the jihad issue, the loyalty issue to non-Islamic governments, etc.

If, however, we would not require all 5 million to formally register their repudiation, which Muslims would we choose to represent them? Only their clerics? Their clerics and their "community leaders"? This would be more bureaucratically manageable of course than requiring all 5 million, but it would be afflicted with an even worse verification/trust problem -- for not only can we not reasonable trust any given Muslim cleric who simply rubber-stamps his repudiation, we would in that circumstance not even have any repudiation from the Muslim masses at all.

Another problem involved here is that such a comprehensive policy would formalize a mass posture and display of hostility and distrust against our own Muslim population: and again, by the time our society (thoroughly deformed by PC MC as it currently is) has become ready to even begin to implement such procedures (let alone even contemplate them), our Muslim population will have increased greatly, likely by two million or more. Such a policy would officially bring out into the open an antagonism between our society and millions of Muslims within our borders. And we all know how mass Muslim populations behave when they feel antagonism against them -- hell, too many of them act up treasonously even when they are mollycoddled, as they are now throughout the West.

Now, I admit, there might be an up side to this problem -- i.e., it would be like bringing a boil on your skin to a state of inflammation the better to lance it and cure it -- i.e. if I must spell it out,

if it would trigger mass anti-social and criminal behaviors of Muslims

then our government could then take the next logical step and crack down on them and deport them etc.

Nevertheless, I still maintain that instead of steering our society toward this kind of reconfiguration that would bring in its train all these headaches and potentials for insurrections and military crackdowns by our National Guard, etc., we should instead work to steer our society toward the much better, more efficient, more logical, and ultimately more humane measure: D.A.M.N. -- Deport All Muslims Now.

For us to continue to agitate for piece-meal measures (whether Spencer's rather mild approach or Lawrence Auster's seemingly bolder but really equally incoherent and insufficient approach) is to tend to have the effect of actually counter-productively working against the process of sociopolitical reconfiguration toward the more logical approach of D.A.M.N.

HESPERADO added - Re: muzzamil's source above -- 'Freedom of Religion, Apostasy in Islam' by Hassan Saeed that he adduces to supposedly prove that millions of Muslims around the world follow Hanafi and that therefore they already repudiate killing female apostates :

President Gayoom's Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs, under pressure from the Islamic Democratic Party (IDP) and the Adaalath Party, banned the book "Freedom of Religion, Apostasy in Islam" -- co-authored by former Attorney-General and presidential candidate Dr Hassan Saeed -- on the grounds that it "violates Islamic principles".

http://www.worldevangelicals.org/news/article.htm...

Now why would all those Muslims be so anxious to ban this book, if it simply follows Hanafi law, the same Hanafi law that millions and millions of Muslims follow throughout the world, according to muzzamil?

Also, notice that muzzamil when asked for a source to prove his claim could do no better than adduce a book written by a Muslim in the Maldives, a little smattering of islands in the Indian Ocean.

Where are the books written by major Hanafi Muslims in all the other countries muzzamil claims proudly follow this most liberal form of Islamic law -- in his own words "India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Central Asia, Afghanistan, China - which alone constitutes almost 600 million Muslims - add to this the smaller proportions in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Bosnia, Albania and many others, approximately half of the Muslim population today..." ?

All these hundreds of millions of Muslims in all these major nations throughout the world follow Hanafi which supposedly stipulates that women cannot be killed for apostasy, and yet all muzzamil can do is adduce one book written by one guy who lives in the MALDIVES...!!!??? A book that other Muslims in the Maldives want to ban!!! (cf. my other comment above)

NOPCHERE said - Our federal government allows immigration from third world countries, willie-nillie, and we expect the immigrants NOT to bring their old country ways with them? And our federal government wants to know why we don't trust them with our health care.

JOCKAIRA said - "Notice that Rifqa is a non-citizen, and therefore because she has committed no crime, is properly in the jurisdiction the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Remanding her case to ICE would allow her to apply for asylum due to endangerment to her life.

While ICE makes its determination, which might take many months or a year or two, there would be no reason for her not to be released on bond into the custody of the Lorenz' as a distressed minor, certainly not a subject for incarceration awaiting decision.

It is very likely, given the circumstances of the case that her petition for asylum would be granted, probably not before her 18th birthday. After that, application for citizenship should be an easy route out of her present difficulties."

End of my copy of original comments thread for this article.