Keep repeating, there is no compulsion in islam, there is no compulsion in islam, there is no compulsion in islam.........

Of course he's sane. He's the one that denounced islam.

Posted by: freewoman at March 22, 2006 8:11 AM

The thousand pound gorilla in the room - hateful intolerance of which we must be intolerant.

Time to have a realpolitic discussion with Karzai and discuss sharia.

If sharia is not subject to a constitution, why are we tolerating these people ? Are we that weak, or are we just that foolish ?

Posted by: dgene at March 22, 2006 8:35 AM

"I believe in the Injil (New Testament) and love Jesus Christ"

That courage is truly humbling. May the Lord make his face to shine upon him.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at March 22, 2006 8:38 AM

I pity the poor soul who has not used the chance to revert to Islam. A real pity.

Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at March 22, 2006 8:51 AM

I doubt that Abdul Rahman wanted to be a figurehead, but he is now. His dilemma is being splashed all over the blogosphere, but it's also all over Fox news, and that means all the Fox affiliates locally across the country. His case puts one question front and center in every American's mind (and Brit's and Aussie's): Is this what we fought and sacrificed lives for? The answer is a resounding "NO!" If Abdul Rahman is found guilty of any Sharia offense, whether or not Karzai executes the sentence, there will be Hell to pay. If only as a practical matter, Karzai would be wise to find a way to let Abdul Rahman go free.

Posted by: longtime lurker at March 22, 2006 8:54 AM

I pity the poor soul who has not used the chance to revert to Islam. A real pity.
Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at March 22, 2006 08:51 AM
---------------------

Ibramsha, God loves you too in-spite of your violent hate filled religion of Islam.

Come to America and try to execute a muslim for becoming a Christian and see what happens.

The Texican.
Freedom, the only choice at any cost.

Posted by: Texican at March 22, 2006 9:01 AM

If I wasn't clear, I mean that this stands to join the Dubai ports deal and the cartoon riots as one more wedge of incomprehension that will separate the Bush administration from its loyal base. President Bush would likewise be wise to take the bully pulpit and use it to "advise" Hamid Karzai on the correct course of action. Perhaps he could mention that he's been told by numerous Muslims that there's no compulsion in religion, and ask for an explanation of how this can be happening if this is true.

Ah, when I run the White House...

Posted by: longtime lurker at March 22, 2006 9:04 AM

Question: "Do you believe in the Koran?"
Response: "I believe, it was inspired by Satan to control people of limited intellect and prone to violent outbursts.

Question: Why do you say these islamaphobic things?
Response: I read a few dozen historical texts.

Question: Convert back or we will kill you.
Response: I knew when I was brought in here I was doomed.

Question: Then why not convert back to islam?
Response: I want to go to heaven not hell.

Posted by: Ronin at March 22, 2006 9:16 AM

Mohideen......you are one sick puppy.

Posted by: marilyn at March 22, 2006 9:24 AM

Mr. Rahman's case has convincingly put the lie to the Islamic myth that "there is no compulsion in religion" and that "Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance".

The Cartoon Jihad was a public relations disaster for Muslims which pales in comparison to the PR disaster of putting Mr. Rahman on trial for the shari'a crime of apostasy. Merely putting Mr. Rahman on trial is all the evidence one needs to convict Islam of extreme intolerance.

Have Muslims in the USA spoken out on the subject of Mr. Rahman? If so, what have they had to say? I ask that question because I believe the eventual fate of Muslims in the USA may be directly tied to the fate of Mr. Rahman.

Posted by: omvi at March 22, 2006 9:45 AM

The imposition of sharia law as defined through the teachings in the Quran once again trumps the full and real freedom of the human spirit that is so lacking in the Islamic world. It refuses to respect or recognise any other religion except its own without any compunction whatsoever.

Very little has changed, this is why these totalitarian Islamic societies continue to implode back into the 10th century while trying to pull the western civilisations back into that same abyss with them.

Posted by: Mackie at March 22, 2006 9:52 AM

"And fear not them who kill the body, but are unable to kill the soul: but rather fear Him who can destroy both body and soul in hell". Mat 10:28

"Then they will deliver you up to be afflicted and will kill you. And you will be hated of all nations for My name's sake." Joh 15:18

Mr. Abdul Rahman, has found something worth dying for!

Of course all of his fellow Moslems from “the religion of peace” have found something worth killing for!

Sahih Bukhari
Volume 9, Book 83, Number 17:
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."

Posted by: Bar at March 22, 2006 10:11 AM

There is an established paradigm for handling cases like this. It's happened particularly in Pakistan, but also elsewhere.

The government in question is under alot of international pressure and realizes it can't go foward with a trial and execution without doing irreparable harm to the country's reputation. So the apostate is either acquitted or summarily released. Shortly afterwards (in some cases, when he is literally walking out of the jailhouse compound), he is shot dead by a private citizen acting on behalf of the ummah and Allah.

If the government even bothers to arrest the perpetrator...he is subsequently released for "lack of evidence."

The apostate is killed and the government is exonerated. Problem solved.

Posted by: Cornelius at March 22, 2006 10:16 AM

PS - Was watching an interview with a Muslim analyst about Abdul Rahman's case on Fox's 'Dayside' yesterday.

The analyst was denouncing the barbarity of the law on apostasy at the same time he was contextualizing (and thereby legitimizing) it by comparing it to treason in the West.

A young man asked the following question: "I'm taking Islamic studies at my university. We are taught that Islam is a religion of tolerance. How does this case square with what we're being taught.

The expert made a brief dodge by claiming that Sharia is "different" from Islam...and then - just as the music came in indicating the end of the segment and a commercial break - he admitted in a hurried (and nervous) voice that Islamic Law is based partly on the Quran.

The whole thing was bizarre and nauseating. One wished he would have said in no uncertain terms:

"The killing of apostates is part of Islamic Law. Whether or not this is "tolerance" is up to you to decide.

Not to be.

Posted by: Cornelius at March 22, 2006 10:34 AM

Even though I'm not a Christian, I applaud the courage of Abdul Rahman for converting from Islam to Christianity and admitting it knowing full well that his life could be in danger. I just wish Bush and other World leaders would show even one-tenth the courage of this man by demanding, in clear and forceful tones, that the Afghan government better set Rahman free or else they will be bombed.

Posted by: Razdan at March 22, 2006 10:46 AM

I am sick over this. I contacted the White House and my two senators. I will also begin donating money to the Barnabus Fund.

It is a one way street with these barbarians. We liberated them. Afghanistan should be a secular constitutional republic without Sharia law. I would not sacrifice the life of even one American soldier for a thousand of these people.

Is there any doubt that if they took control here or anywhere else that they don't have control now that women and people of other faiths or atheists or gays would be repressed and/or murdered.

Posted by: Founding Forefather at March 22, 2006 10:52 AM

I share your sentiments, Razdan. Even non-Christians know that this is crossing the line. While our government need not get into specifics, we can let Muslim-run, aid-receiving governments know that if they allow the prosecution and execution of a person for changing from Muslim to Christian, we will have to reconsider the definition of "acceptable tactics" in the WoT.

Posted by: guiltfree at March 22, 2006 10:53 AM

Cornelius,

I saw the weasel as well on Fox, but he didn't seem to gain any traction with his prevarications. I didn't catch his name, either, but he seemed like the usual Pakistani who can't shake Islam despite his British dressing.

Posted by: longtime lurker at March 22, 2006 11:03 AM

Question: Then why not convert back to islam?
Response: I want to go to heaven not hell.
Posted by: Ronin at March 22, 2006 09:16 AM

From http://www.searchtruth.com/searchHadith.php?keyword=gabriel+paradise+hell&translator=3&search=1&book=&start=0&records_display=10&search_word=all
we find:
===
Narrated AbuHurayrah: The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) said: When Allah created paradise, He said to gabriel: Go and look at it. He went and looked at it, then came and said: O my Lord! By Thy might, no one who hears of it will fail to enter it. He then surrounded it with disagreeable things, and said: Go and look at it, gabriel. He went and looked at it, then came and said: O my Lord! By Thy might, I am afraid that no one will enter it. When Allah created hell, He said: Go and look at it, gabriel. He went and looked at it, then came and said: O my Lord! By Thy might, no one who hears of it will enter it. He then surrounded it with desirable things and said: Go and look at it, gabriel. He went, looked at it, then came and said: O my Lord! By Thy might and power, I am afraid that no one will remain who does not enter it. (Book #40, Hadith #4726) (Sunan Abu Dawood)
===

Abdul Rahman, the Christian is desirous of going to the apparent heaven which is indeed hell.

Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at March 22, 2006 11:03 AM

It is a one way street
Posted by: Founding Forefather at March 22, 2006 10:52 AM

True. A non-Muslim is under no compulsion whatsoever to become a Muslim. However, a Muslim has no permission to leave Islam. Any Muslim who leaves Islam would be given three opportunities to revert back to Islam. If the one who left Islam refuses all three opportunities, he needs to be killed.

Islam is indeed a one way street. Please enter it only when you are convinced that it is the true religion; do not enter it for temporary benefits. Incidentally, Muslims have no permission to induce a non-Muslim to become a Muslim by offering worldly benefits.

Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at March 22, 2006 11:11 AM

Islam is indeed a one way street.

Thanks for clarifying that for us, Mohideen! I suppose this applies not only to the brain-dead people who wilfully convert to Islam but also to those who were born into it and thus did not subscribe to this cult out of their own free will, am I right?

Posted by: Razdan at March 22, 2006 11:16 AM

Mohideen, first I have no freaking idea whom AbuHurayrah was and could care less. I do not now and never will consider allah a divine being. I don’t think allah and the God worshiped by the other mainstream religions to be the same deity. I do not remember ever discussing my own religious faith or lack of on this or any list. I encourage you to believe whatever you wish but when you attempt to sell it to me you cross a line. According to my limited knowledge of islam I am already doomed to go to hell and I am good with that. If heaven is full of muslims I will gladly spend eternity elsewhere. Good day to you sir, (my apologies to Willy Wonka)

Posted by: Ronin at March 22, 2006 11:16 AM

Mohideen, your cult is based on a pedophile, thief, and all around BAD man. You have to threaten to kill these people, who have seen the light, to stay and worship him.

Why would anyone want to keep a person in their cult when it's obvious they don't want to be there? Why? To keep your numbers up? Why? Afraid they are right? Why?

Posted by: freewoman at March 22, 2006 11:19 AM

The heaven of Christians is a place of glorifying God, the heaven of islam is a place for continuous sex and flowing wine. The heaven of islam is a place for human satifaction, heaven is a place for the spirit in Christianity. One only has to compare the central figure in each religion to see who is trully following God and who is in the service of satan.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at March 22, 2006 11:29 AM

If the one who left Islam refuses all three opportunities, he needs to be killed.

What a sick mind!

And this is an apologist (although obviously one who can't read his audience very well).

Posted by: Yojimbo at March 22, 2006 11:36 AM

Hey, Mo, we all know that jihadists get 72 virgins when they die. hehe When a normal muslim dies, let's say old age, and say he never killed an infidel, does the old muslim get 72 virgins also, just cuz he's a muslim?

And please clarify what a female muslim gets when she dies. And don't say 72 mops and brooms.
If she had the same disillusions as male muslims, she should get 72 studs.

Posted by: freewoman at March 22, 2006 11:37 AM

Abdul Rahman, the Christian is desirous of going to the apparent heaven which is indeed hell.

Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha
Totally the opposite, Mohideen. Your allah is satan who appeared as an angel of light to a very bad example of humanity. Any true Christian would have to die before accepting allah....to accept him would be bending the knee to satan.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at March 22, 2006 11:39 AM

Well, Patriot, that wouldn't be any fun!!!

Posted by: freewoman at March 22, 2006 11:43 AM

Now let’s not be too hard on mohideen it will take him quite a while to formulate an answer to my apostate ways. BTW, I have always taken the extra time to uncapitalize islam, mohammud, and muslim and none of you caught it. It’s just my small way of sticking yet another stick in their eyes.

Posted by: Ronin at March 22, 2006 11:52 AM

You go Ronin. I usually try to do the same thing.

Posted by: freewoman at March 22, 2006 11:53 AM

So Mohideen's prenatal rule:

Do not get born into Islam, or we can kill you if you try to leave.

That's a religion for homicidal maniacs, not men.

Posted by: profitsbeard at March 22, 2006 12:00 PM

Mohideen

But I thought hell was full of ungrateful Moslem women?

Sahih Muslim
Book 001, Number 0142:

Allah observed: O womenfolk, you should give charity and ask much forgiveness for I saw you in bulk amongst the dwellers of Hell. A wise lady among them said: Why is it, Messenger of Allah, that our folk is in bulk in Hell? Upon this the Holy Prophet observed: You curse too much and are ungrateful to your spouses. I have seen none lacking in common sense and failing in religion but (at the same time) robbing the wisdom of the wise, besides you. Upon this the woman remarked: What is wrong with our common sense and with religion? He (the Holy Prophet) observed: Your lack of common sense (can be well judged from the fact) that the evidence of two women is equal to one man, that is a proof of the lack of common sense, and you spend some nights (and days) in which you do not offer prayer and in the month of Ramadan (during the days) you do not observe fast, that is a failing in religion. This hadith has been narrated on the authority of Abu Tahir with this chain of transmitters.

------------

Sahih Infidel
Book 1, Number 1:

I wise man observed: O Moslem, you should give charity and ask much forgiveness for I saw you in bulk amongst the dwellers of Hell. A wise lady among them said: Why is it, wise man, that our folk is in bulk in Hell? Upon this the wise man observed: I have seen all lacking in common sense and promoting a false religion (at the same time) robbing the wisdom of the wise. Upon this the woman remarked: What is wrong with our common sense and with our false religion? He (the wise man) observed: Your lack of common sense (can be well judged from the fact) that you believe the evidence of two women is equal to one man, that is a proof of the lack of common sense, that is a failing in religion. This had-it has been re-narrated on the authority of nonentity.

Posted by: Bar at March 22, 2006 12:30 PM

Funny but there's another Abdul Rahman, in Indonesia, who has been charged with blasphemy. He is only faced with five years in jail though not an early exit from the world.

Posted by: patung at March 22, 2006 12:51 PM

Mohideen,

You often say things that are shocking to us here, but I will grant that, unlike many Islamic apologists, you give us what do appear to be your honest opinions. However, there are some inaccuracies in your previous posts in this thread.

You say “A non-Muslim is under no compulsion whatsoever to become a Muslim.”

This is false. First, you fail to comprehend what is happening in the above news story. This man was brought up from birth to be Muslim. It does not make sense, strictly speaking, to say he was truly a Muslim when he was an infant, because he would not have understood it. (And you say, quoted below, that one must be convinced that islam is the true religion. An infant does not have that capacity). So he was not a Muslim as an infant, but then he became a Muslim under external man-made conditions in which it is not permissible for him to choose any other religion or no religion (by the time he becomes an adult). He must be Muslim by the time he is an adult, otherwise he is considered an apostate. That is compulsion to become a Muslim. In fact, they (most Afghans) have no choice in the matter.

You also misunderstand the Koran. Verse 9:5 states that the idolators must be killed unless they convert to Islam. Verse 9:29 states that Christians and Jews must (a) convert to Islam or else (b) accept dhimmitude subjugation or slavery, or (c), failing to accept b, be killed.

You said “Islam is indeed a one way street. Please enter it only when you are convinced that it is the true religion; do not enter it for temporary benefits. Incidentally, Muslims have no permission to induce a non-Muslim to become a Muslim by offering worldly benefits.”

Being given a choice between death as a non-Muslim and life as a Muslim (convert) constitutes a worldly benefit. That’s stated in verses such as 9:5 (jihad policy: convert or die), 8:39, 2:193 [fight them until there is no more fitnah and all religion is for Allah, but if they cease fitnah, then only fight those “wrong-doers” (i.e., disbelievers, polytheists—those who produce fitnah; and disbelievers/polytheists produce fitnah by their mere presence in proximity to Muslims 8:73)]. The dhimmitude option from verse 9:29, under the conditions of a Muslim state, provides worldly benefits/inducements. Because dhimmitude is such a humiliating, onerous, and (literally) taxing condition, and because dhimmis may be executed or killed much more easily than a Muslim (the law of retaliation, life-for-life, does not apply if a Muslim kills a non-Muslim; it only applies when a Muslim is killed), there are considerable worldly benefit for becoming a Muslim (or declaring that one is a Muslim). Becoming a Muslim removes the humiliating condition, one’s life is better protected, one generally has to pay less tax, etc.

What the Christian in this story has demonstrated is great bravery in refusing to play the game. The Muslim authorities cannot know whether or not he is truly a Muslim. They simply want him to claim he is a Muslim once again, regardless of whether this is true or false. They are trying to manipulate outward appearances. They are trying to make an example of him, so that others may be warned. This is how Islam works in practice. This is why Islam is more of a political system than a true religion. Islam is so bad, people are dying to get out. No other religion today kills people for leaving.

Posted by: Archimedes at March 22, 2006 1:00 PM

Islam - the religion of force.

Posted by: Report at March 22, 2006 1:01 PM

islam=cult

Posted by: freewoman at March 22, 2006 1:06 PM

And I'm sure , given the choice, a muslim woman would not have been raised muslim.

Posted by: freewoman at March 22, 2006 1:07 PM

ISLAM: a religion of the stupid, by the stupid, for the stupid. [I give Mohideen's post as a proof.]

Posted by: Razdan at March 22, 2006 1:09 PM

": The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) said: When Allah created paradise, He said to gabriel: "..

AGAIN

": The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) said: When Allah created paradise, He said to gabriel: "

Islam is again displaying how it is decieved..

Mohammud, (the "apostle") never spoke to "alah", only gabriel. So, mohammud is only repeating what was implanted by the devil's apostle, Gabriel.

Is this all you can state to show a believer in Christ should be killed, Mohideen Ibramsha
?

Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at March 22, 2006 1:13 PM

Either mohideen is at a loss for words, or he's been scared off.

Posted by: freewoman at March 22, 2006 1:19 PM

Founding Forefather said

Afghanistan should be a secular constitutional republic without Sharia law. I would not sacrifice the life of even one American soldier for a thousand of these people.

I agree literally with these two statements when taken individually. But put them together, and you get our current muddled policy. If they are going to have a constitutional republic without Shari'a, it's going to cost alot of American soldiers' lives to make that happen. If we agree that it is not worth the life of one soldier, then we have to accept that they will choose Shari'a. If they choose Shari'a, they will execute each other for not being Muslim, or not being the right kind of Muslim, or not being Muslim enough.

We went into Afghanistan to punish them for their terrorism and violence, not to reward them with our values and freedoms. Just in case there really were just a few bad apples (Taliban) oppressing the moderate masses, we got rid of those bad apples at the top. And now we know that the entire barrel was spoiled all along. If we were fighting to save the Afghans, we were wasting our precious resources.

I hope that this one brave Afghan's life is spared. If so, it will only be thanks to the compassion of Christians outside Afghanistan. But much more than this, I hope that our society learns a lesson about Islam from this story, and acts to protect ourselves from it. It is not a few extremist leaders hijacking Islam, it is an extremist religion to its core.

Posted by: special_guest at March 22, 2006 1:20 PM

How can a Muslim like Mohideen say something like “A non-Muslim is under no compulsion whatsoever to become a Muslim.”? It boggles the mind that he would think we are that gullible.

Posted by: Television at March 22, 2006 1:20 PM

Islam - the Religion of Death

Posted by: special_guest at March 22, 2006 1:23 PM

Islam is not only a religious cult; they also embody the "spirit of antichrist" the bible mentions.

Mohammad didn't worship the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; Mo worshipped some moon-god known as Allah.

In Islam they claim that Jesus was simply a prophet, and that Jesus was not the son of God. Islam is completely and totally against who Jesus himself said He was: the Son of God, and God in the flesh. Jesus said, "I and my Father are One". John 10:30

Posted by: champ at March 22, 2006 1:33 PM

Islam is no different than the cult David Koresh was infactuated with..child sex, death and brainwashing. Mo was also a child molestor..
NO Virgins for you Mujahadeen!
Carolyn...Hit the target bullseye.
The only satisfaction I see with the garbled ramblings of Muj is he will be in hell forever with Mohammed Atta and the rest of the brainwashed Islamic morons. Anyone notice the smoke column off the Twin Towers of Satan?
That's who greeted Atta and his murderous clan.
Arafathead is down there also so there is retribution believing in a Satanic cult like Islam. fake document, Koran...Fake prophet, Mojo, cult religion, Islam. I'd take the sword anyday over believing anything about Islam.
Bush says he's a Christian but haven't heard anything from that bimbo about talking to the Karzi regime....but he's created an enormously full plate to deal with at the moment.

Posted by: Siciliano at March 22, 2006 1:52 PM

Islam=Lucifer

Posted by: pythagoras at March 22, 2006 1:57 PM

Abdul Rahman, God Bless you brother for coming to faith in Christ. Welcome home to the Christian community. You are a true witness for the Christ and the Christian faith.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at March 22, 2006 2:20 PM

Carolyn2:

I do agree with you that Muhammed was a singular horror of a human being, but it is not clear that Muhammed had anything to do with the foundings of Islam actually. All we have to go on with regards to this assertion is the Arabs' word that this guy Muhammed was Islam's founder. And we all know what the word of the Arabs is worth...

BUT in the Israel-Palestine town of Hazor a MOSQUE was unearthed during the 1950s---AND IT WAS FOUND TO BE AT LEAST 3000 YEARS OLD! In it were found statues of humanoids bearing the Islamic crescent moon carvings on their chests. These statues included that of a large male and three smaller females which have been determined by archaeological scholars of the region to be likenesses of allah and his three daughters.

Islam therefore predates Muhammed by at least 1500 years. Much of what is in the Kuran is window dressing. As we all know, with Islam it is the KILLING that is the core of the religion--and, not really the scripted texts that have been presented to humanity.

Allah may very well be Satan. You'll remember that when Jesus exorcised a demon from a possessed man, the demon claimed "its name was legion". Not only does allah have 99 names that we (and the Muslims) are aware of; allah also went under the names of Sin, Marduk, ba-al (the root of the name Beelzebub used for Satan). It would seem that allah's name is also legion. Of course, what the demon told Jesus in effect was that he/she/it (your choice of pronoun), over the pasage of millennia, used name after name to trick people. Allah was one of its more successful ventures it seems.

Posted by: pythagoras at March 22, 2006 2:20 PM

As others have pointed out, this case presents a golden opportunity for civilization. Now is the time to contact your congressmen or M.P., and express your dismay. This is the best chance we've had in a long time to force Bush's and Blair's hand. All the rhetoric and b.s. about the need, or even the desireability, for muslim democracies should be put to rest, forever.

Posted by: Infidel33 at March 22, 2006 2:20 PM

Siciliano
Anyone notice the smoke column off the Twin Towers of Satan?

Someone here awhile back posted a link to a 14 minute Bush-bashing extravaganza. Contained within was the film clip which showed the "face" appearing out of the smoke. It was chilling to watch, even as your mind was telling you it had to be just an unusual chance occurrence.

On topic:

Is Abdul Rahman fated to become this war's Archduke Franz Ferdinand?

Unfortunately, as was stated earlier, he could possibly be released only to have muslim justice administered on the street.

Bush may be astounding me with his seeming ignorance of his errors, but that doesn't mean the Republican Party should be abandoned.

Posted by: zhu97 at March 22, 2006 2:31 PM

Archimedes,

Stories like the above article is proving to me everyday that the Muslim faith is now showing its true colors. The Muslim community is fearful of a much more growing in size Christian community. There is now over 2 billion Christians and more people coming into the Christian faith everyday. Not suprising why this trial of this Christian convert from Islam is going on is a fearful reaction from the Muslim world on the sucess of the spread of the Christian gospel. The truth of the matter is that there are more Muslims getting out of the Muslim faith and becoming Christian, even dying to be able to do so. What is being seen is a new era of Christian martyrs.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at March 22, 2006 2:36 PM

I agree Mr. rahman. You are an intelligent human being and I respect that.

It's just that Islam doesn't.

Posted by: pythagoras at March 22, 2006 2:37 PM

The more I read on this site, and on others similar to it, I have to say I get angryer by the second.

I watch US, British, Australian, Canadian etc. Troops fighting to impose democracy to regions that have never had it before.

Then we watch in terror and disbelief as Iraq elects a extremist cleric as its president, Iran elects a extremist wingnut to be president, Palestinians elect a full blown terrorist organization into parliament, and Egypt elects 30% of its parlamentary members that are from the Brotherhood of Muslim terrorist organization.

At what point do our leaders in the West wake up and say enough is enough. Lets do what every left wing freak who thinks peace is around the corner thinks we should do, and pull out of every Muslim country we are supporting, and stop doing business with them every way we can.

Lets make every commodity price soar for Arab countries, like $1000 a pound for tomatoes. Let's face it oil is a commodity and there is no reason for the west to be held hostage the way it is by oil producing countries.

Then give them a stern warning, every terrorist attack on western countries and citizens will be met with a nuke on the soil of the citizens that participated in it, ie: 2 Arabs cut off the head of a westerner, and one Iraqi blows up a bus etc.
Simple math 2 nukes for Saudi Arabia, 1 for Iraq problem solved.

I know this is an insane idea, but I feel that the cause is becoming so hopeless that something like this is what might be needed.

One seriuosly pissed off Niv.

Posted by: niv at March 22, 2006 2:44 PM

If you feel this case is unjust, and would like to do something more active than writing on a forum, you might consider picketing the Helmand restaurants operated by the Karzai family. They are located in Baltimore, Boston, and San Francisco.

as President, Mr. Karzai has final word on any decisions made about capital punishment, per article 129 of the Afghan Constitution:
http://www.oefre.unibe.ch/law/icl/af00000_.html

This could be a more direct way for your words to reach Karzai, aside from letter-writing and petitioning Congress.

Posted by: jehana at March 22, 2006 3:26 PM

Granny W,

This story was discussed on the James O Brein show on LBC.
Was it you who e mailed it to him ?

We need to e mail this story to as many radio shows both here and abroad, local papers etc.

The word is seriously getting out.

Regards

AI

Posted by: apostate_islam at March 22, 2006 3:52 PM

No it was not me, but good luck and respect to whoever it was.
I had a news shot from the Barnabas Fund about him last night; O'Brien may have heard via that source.

Posted by: Granny Weatherwax at March 22, 2006 3:57 PM

jehana,

Thanks for the link.

My impression of Karzai is that he will do whatever is most expedient in his own interests, i.e., he will not in the end allow this man to be executed. He probably will play to the interests of the hard-line Islamists as well as the coaltion governments of U.S., etc., and come up with some kind of compromise. Perhaps Abdul Rahman will end up with a jail sentence of a few years length, similar to the sentences given for "blasphemous" journalists there.

Posted by: Archimedes at March 22, 2006 4:04 PM

give it up,Mohideen Ibramsha … your fighting a looseing battle here
Posted by: patriot2 at March 22, 2006 11:23 AM

Any search – Yahoo or Google or any – on a topic that is a darling of the MSM (Main Stream Media) would naturally yield very large number of hits. High volume does not imply high quality. Compare iron and gold. When you search on a topic that is favored by the MSM you are looking for iron and not gold.

The Traditions cannot be accepted just because Ibn Ishaq or Tabari says so. Please see “7. Consistency: Even present test of authenticity” in my blog http://spaces.msn.com/deentech/ . We accept consistent Traditions alone. So giving any number of unverified Traditions in support of your position does not influence our decision. We stand by 2:256 of the Holy Quran that clearly states that “There is no compulsion in Islam.”

Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at March 22, 2006 4:36 PM

Oh yes there is mo.

Change to muslim.

or

Die.

If you are a muslim, stay that way or die.

Compulsion/coercion

Posted by: freewoman at March 22, 2006 5:04 PM

patriot2,

You may be right. Abdul Rahman is at risk as it is, now, with the public knowing that he is an apostate (he'd be endangered even in the U.S. All the more reason for us to try and do whatever we can.

I was looking through the Afghan Constitution from Jehana's link. The President can indeed override a decision involving captial punishment, Article 129.

In order to arrive at a decision, they will have to negotiate through a morass of conflicting statements in their constitution.
For example:

Article 2 [Religions]
(1) The religion of the state of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan is the sacred religion of Islam .
(2) Followers of other religions are free to exercise their faith and perform their religious rites within the limits of the provisions of law.

...and

Article 3 [Law and Religion]
In Afghanistan, no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam.

...which contradict

Article 7 [International Law]
(1) The state shall abide by the UN charter, international treaties, international conventions that Afghanistan has signed, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

...in order to remove the contradiction, without changing the above wording, they have to change their interpretation of Islamic law. That is, they have to reject those Hadith reports of Mohammad calling for the execution of apostates. The Koran does not explicitly call for the execution of apostates simply on the grounds that they have apostatized. (I.e., it does not directly say this in one verse or passage).

What else in the constitution would executing an apostate contradict?

Article 29 [Torture]
(1) Torture of human beings is prohibited.
(2) No person, even with the intention of discovering the truth, can resort to torture or order the torture of another person who may be under prosecution, arrest, or imprisoned, or convicted to punishment.
(3) Punishment contrary to human integrity is prohibited.

Doesn't threatening someone with execution, in order to compel them to declare that they have re-accepted Islam (exclusively), constitute torture?

Article 22 [Equality]
(1) Any kind of discrimination and privilege between the citizens of Afghanistan are prohibited.
(2) The citizens of Afghanistan -- whether man or woman -- have equal rights and duties before the law.

Christians are not punished for converting to Islam. Therefore the law violates Article 22, and once again shows how Islamic law, as construed traditionally, conflicts with international law. Islamic law treats Muslims and non-Muslims as inherently unequal.

Ammendments

Article 149 [Islam, Fundamental Rights]
(1) The provisions of adherence to the fundamentals of the sacred religion of Islam and the regime of the Islamic Republic cannot be amended.
(2) The amendment of the fundamental rights of the people are permitted only in order to make them more effective.
(3) Considering new experiences and requirements of the time, other contents of this Constitution can be amended by the proposal of the President or by the majority of the National Assembly in accordance with the provisions of Article 67 and 146 of this constitution.

If the adherence to Islamic law cannot be changed, then they have to change their interpretation of Islamic law. Of course, Islamic law should not have been allowed into the constitution in the first place, but working with what's there, some practical solution will have to involve a reinterpretation of Islamic apostacy law, i.e., any form of penalty whatsoever must be removed. (Otherwise it violates Article 22).

Who's to blame for all of this? 1. Islamists. 2. The U.N., for allowing for so long this dual existence of Islamic standards and Universal standards. 3. The governments of the coalition countries for being uneducated with regards to Islam.

Posted by: Archimedes at March 22, 2006 5:09 PM

Mohideen,

You have an opportunity to respond to my post of March 22, 2006 01:00 PM

My own personal theory about the "no compulsion in religion" statement in 2:256 is that Allah had a mental lapse, like all those times he says he is forgiving and merciful while he burns the non-Muslims in hell-fire and refuses to accept their good works.

In any case, you think that executing apostates constitutes no compulsion in religion (never mind that Allah leads astray who he will). How can you seriously argue that this does not constitute compulsion in religion?

Posted by: Archimedes at March 22, 2006 5:16 PM

I pick # 2 and # 3. Our leaders really needed a crash course in islam before allowing this constitution to be ratified.

Anyone could see that, Afghanistan was in lousy shape when we went in, and when they started the new government and let it be islam based, it would become the sad shape it started out as.

Posted by: freewoman at March 22, 2006 5:17 PM

Have Muslims in the USA spoken out on the subject of Mr. Rahman? … I believe the eventual fate of Muslims in the USA may be directly tied to the fate of Mr. Rahman.
Posted by: omvi at March 22, 2006 09:45 AM

Why presume that Muslims in America would abandon Islam?

Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at March 22, 2006 5:26 PM

"No compulsion in religion" in point of fact has a very narrow application.

It does NOT apply to polytheists (accept Islam or the sword). It does NOT apply to Muslims themselves (as we have seen, the penalty for leaving the faith is death, which is quite obviously the most severe form of compulsion). It applies only to 'People of the Book'...and to them, only if they pay the jizya and "feel themselves subdued."

Point this out anytime you hear a Muslim or apologist selling the concept of Islamic tolerance by reciting the "no compulsion in religion" quote. One need not even bother with arguments of abrogation; Islamic law speaks for itself.

Posted by: Cornelius at March 22, 2006 5:34 PM

"... He is not a normal person. He doesn't talk like a normal person..."
Of course not. He talks like a Christian. An intelligent, educated, Christian.
After a lifetime of hearing nothing but lies from the Quran and Mohammad, the truth does not sound "normal".
"For 30 years, we have fought religious wars in this country and there is no way we are going to allow an Afghan to insult us by becoming Christian," said Mohammed Jan, 38, who lives opposite Rahman's father, Abdul Manan. "This has brought so much shame."
Whatthey fail to realize is that it is Islam and the lies that go invariably go with it that have shamed them, not this man and his honesty.
Jesus Christ said "I am the (only) way, the (only) truth and the (only) life. NO MAN comes to the Father except through me. If you know me, you will know my Father also." (John 14:16)
"Hear O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one." (Mark 12:29)
"I and the Father are one." (John 10:30)
"Whoever hates me hates my Father also." (John 15:23)

Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at March 22, 2006 5:37 PM

I like Jehana's suggestion about picketing the Karzai family restaurants in the United States.While Karzai is little more than mayor of Kabul, and unlikely to survive if/when the protection of the United States is removed, he should be placed under as much pressure as possible to reform Afghan law. Americans of any faith are welcome to defend his government. Just don't openly practice a non-Islamic faith while on Afghan soil. One is reminded of the sickening policy of the Saudis who welcomed U.S. forces to defend the Kingdom from Saddam, then went out of their way to prevent U.S. military chaplains from carrying out their duties. To make matters worse, remember the weak response from the U.S.Government in giving in to Saudi demands.

Posted by: MP at March 22, 2006 5:47 PM

Abdul Rahman will be aquitted and released, and as Cornelius pointed out, will be killed soon after by any passing muslim. Thus all players, including Western governments will be satisfied. This has what has happened, in Pakistan and Iran, in cases such as this

Posted by: DP111 at March 22, 2006 5:50 PM

contd:

Abdul Rahman's life hangs in the balance whether he is released or not. That is the situation.

Please pray for Abdul Rahman. In church, when the minister asks for prayers of intercession, please think and pray for Abdul Rahman.

Posted by: DP111 at March 22, 2006 5:55 PM

DP111,

Should Abdul Rahman indeed be murdered, the Muslim propaganda-mill will respond to the chorus of indignation from the West by saying something to the effect:

"Muslims are dying every day in Iraq and Palestine and yet the West becomes so indignant at the death of a single Christian. This shows how truly racist the Western world is and how they care nothing about Muslims."

And the liberal/Left will be evvectively silenced (if they were ever inclined to speak out in the first place).

Posted by: Cornelius at March 22, 2006 6:54 PM

effectively

Posted by: Cornelius at March 22, 2006 6:54 PM

For those of you who attend church, especially those with the big screen on the wall. Take the time to make a slide about this incident and then ask for prayers on behalf of Mr Abdul Rahman. Use this as a sounding board to draw more attention to it. Follow up with calls to your local news about how many hundreds prayed in support. The more religions the better, I doubt any mosque will jump in but the rest of us could really up the pressure.

Posted by: Ronin at March 22, 2006 7:07 PM

“…., a Muslim has no permission to leave Islam. Any Muslim who leaves Islam would be given three opportunities to revert back to Islam. If the one who left Islam refuses all three opportunities, he needs to be killed.
Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at March 22, 2006 11:11 AM

We stand by 2:256 of the Holy Quran that clearly states that “There is no compulsion in Islam.” Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at March 22, 2006 04:36 PM

Mohideen - How do you reconcile those 2 statements?

(BTW - Don't even think of suggesting that the fact that an "opportunity" to return to Islam is extended before the apostate is killed in some sense proves noncompulsion or we will rightfully laugh your posterior straight out of here.)

Posted by: Caroline at March 22, 2006 7:23 PM

"Any search – Yahoo or Google or any – on a topic that is a darling of the MSM (Main Stream Media) would naturally yield very large number of hits. High volume does not imply high quality. Compare iron and gold. When you search on a topic that is favored by the MSM you are looking for iron and not gold."
-Mohideen Ibramsha at March 22, 2006 04:36 PM

A little OT. Hate to break it to you bucko, but unless you're making electronic devices or coating mylar fabric for infrared shielding for spacecraft, gold is pretty useless. Gold is pretty and looks good for decoration, but iron is useful and strong. I'll take my information made of metaphorical iron over gold any day. Our iron facts can scrape away the gold leaf façade of your excuses and obfuscations any day.

Posted by: Eisenhund at March 22, 2006 7:32 PM

Caroline,

It is not suprising that one sees a contradiction in responding to Mohideen's statement about the reference to the "no compulsion in religion " stuff. Just reading some of the verses in the Quran can create a sense of confusion because of the contradictions found.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at March 22, 2006 7:35 PM

bigcatgirl13106 -

The cognitive dissonance must be so great I'm surprised it doesn't produce widespread spontaneous human head combustion in the Muslim population.

(I'm picturing here illustr8rg8r's colorful image - from another thread - of exploding heads, only occurring spontaneously rather than via remotely controlled detonation):-)

Posted by: Caroline at March 22, 2006 7:48 PM

I suppose this applies …to those who were born into it and thus did not subscribe to this cult out of their own free will, am I right?
Posted by: Razdan at March 22, 2006 11:16 AM

No, the Muslim children do have the option not to follow Islam, if they decide while they are children. From http://www.searchtruth.com/searchHadith.php?keyword=children+jew+revealed&translator=3&search=1&book=&start=0&records_display=10&search_word=all
we have:
===
Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas: When the children of a woman (in pre-Islamic days) did not survive, she took a vow on herself that if her child survives, she would convert it a jew. When Banu an-Nadir were expelled (from Arabia), there were some children of the Ansar (Helpers) among them. They said: We shall not leave our children. So Allah the Exalted revealed; "Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth stands out clear from error." (Book #14, Hadith #2676) (Sunan Abudawud)
===

It is generally accepted that when a girl gets her first period, she is no more a child; a boy loses his childhood when he reaches the age of puberty. Before that stage, the child born to a Muslim can leave Islam.

For example, a Muslim child adopted and brought up by Christian parents as a Christian is allowed to practice Christianity.

Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at March 22, 2006 7:52 PM

"a Muslim has no permission to leave Islam."
-Mohideen Ibramsha at March 22, 2006 11:11 AM

BTW, where the hell do you people get off telling anyone that someone needs your permission to change their religion? Who or what someone else worships is none of your damned business. The sheer ARROGANCE of Islam is nothing short of stunning. Like one giant antfarm. Oh sorry, ants are usually symbolic of industriousness. They don't sit on their posteriors or stick the same in the air, say inshallah, and hope that their genie "god" will cross his arms and nod. *poof* Everything is provided. The day Mohammedans start building, inventing, and farming, and worrying less about what diety their neighbor worships will be the day they'll be much happier and less of a pain in the a.. to the rest of us.

(deep breath)

Posted by: Eisenhund at March 22, 2006 8:00 PM

Great quote patriot2. I've often wondered what kind of god would give man/woman the capacity to question and reason, then punish someone for exercising it. Its like giving a child a toy then smacking him when he plays with it. Any god that can't stand his own reflection is a weak and insecure one indeed.

Posted by: Eisenhund at March 22, 2006 8:18 PM

Mohideen - you know damn well that a child is in no position to make an independent decision to leave the religion of their parents. They are dependent upon their parents for food and sustenance, so whatever the point you are making it is ridiculous and absurd. Stick with the adults here and answer my question. Reconcile your 2 previous statements with regard to adults:

“…a Muslim has no permission to leave Islam. Any Muslim who leaves Islam would be given three opportunities to revert back to Islam. If the one who left Islam refuses all three opportunities, he needs to be killed."
Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at March 22, 2006 11:11 AM

"We stand by 2:256 of the Holy Quran that clearly states that “There is no compulsion in Islam.”" Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at March 22, 2006 04:36 PM

Reconcile those statements for adults Mohideen....

Posted by: Caroline at March 22, 2006 8:35 PM

Archimedes' answer to Mohideen is brilliant. Indeed, at what time did Abdul Rahman "enter" Islam when it was the only thing that he was taught, or even be allowed to be taught? As sin itself, he was born into it and at no time in his life was he given a choice until the day came when he saw the truth of the gospel of Christ, and threw off (through redemption and grace from God) the shackles of sin and death.

It would seem to me that if Islam was truly a religion of "no compulsion," and a truth weightier than any other, then it would not need to threaten those who leave it. Surely those leaving it would, in time, realize the error of their misguided ways, and return to it with repentant hearts.

The god of Islam cannot afford this mercy to his followers, because this religion is one of hate, oppression, and death, and no one having experienced the forgiveness and grace of God would ever go back to it. I would also like to add that Abdul Rahman is just one of tens of thousands of Christ-followers who are martyred every year for their faith. Let him be a reminder to other believers here of what is in store for millions of fellow-believers all over the world, who are couragously standing up in the face of satan's lies of "no compulsion." Pray for them.

Posted by: yohannbiimu at March 22, 2006 8:53 PM

Abdul Rahman, the Christian is desirous of going to the apparent heaven which is indeed hell.
Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha

Wow! A made up religion and this guy gives us a brief made up story about his made up religion's allah..
The more this guy and others like him continue to talk the more people will wake up to the dangers of Islam. Ibramsha tells us that Islam is the religion of peace in one breath and in the other he says that Abdul Rahman has 3 chances to revert back to Islam or he will be killed. What kind of a sane person would believe that islam is a religion of peace while Mr. Rahman's life hangs in the balance since he left islam for Christianity?
I am sickened by the fact that my country has spent so much in the way of our soldier's blood and our country's dollars to "liberate" Afghanistan and for WHAT? This crap is going to stick in my craw and millions of other's craw until America and our allies wake up and do something positive in eliminating the menace of Islam and the deranged people who follow it. If this man's plight does not awaken America now then we, the people, will have to let our politicians know that we have had enough of this crap and something had better be done. Either get us the hell out of Afghanistan and Iraq or make the people in their respective countries respect human rights and dignity. Otherwise we will have no other option but to eliminate those who are against us....ain't that right, Mr. Bush?

Posted by: ivehadenuff at March 22, 2006 8:55 PM

the heaven of islam is a place for continuous sex and flowing wine.
Posted by: Carolyn2 at March 22, 2006 11:29 AM

Wrong. There is no sex in Heaven. The wine given in Heaven is not an intoxicant. Islam forbids all intoxicants and not just wine.

Quoting from the Holy Quran, we have:
===
20:117 Then We said: “O Adam! Verily this is an enemy to thee and thy wife: so let him not get you both out of the Garden so that thou art landed in misery.
20:118 “There is therein (enough provision) for thee not to go hungry nor to go naked”
20:119 “Nor to suffer from thirst nor from the sun’s heat.”
20:120 But Satan whispered evil to him: he said “O Adam! Shall I lead thee to Tree of Eternity and to a kingdom that never decays?”
20:121 In the result they both ate of the tree and so their nakedness appeared to them: they began to sew together for their covering leaves from the Garden: thus did Adam disobey His Lord and allow himself to be seduced.
20:122 But his Lord chose him (for His Grace): He turned to him and gave him guidance.
20:123 HE said: “Get ye down both of you all together; but if as is sure there comes to you guidance from Me whosoever follows My guidance will not lose his way nor fall into misery.
===

It is the nature of Heaven that the inhabitants are not naked. Why should one assume that the Heaven changes its nature? Since the inhabitants of the Heaven do not go naked, there is no sex in Heaven.

Regarding wine, Inshah Allah, we hope to write on it in my blog http://spaces.msn.com/deentech/ soon.

Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at March 22, 2006 9:03 PM

Huh?
Qur’an 56:33 “Unending, and unforbidden, exalted beds, and maidens incomparable. We have formed them in a distinctive fashion and made them virgins, loving companions matched in age, for the sake of those of the right hand.” [Another translation reads:] “On couches or thrones raised high. Verily, We have created them (maidens) incomparable: We have formed their maidens as a special creation, and made them to grow a new growth. We made them virgins—pure and undefiled, lovers, matched in age.”

Posted by: Carolyn2 at March 22, 2006 9:09 PM

No sex? Then why do you need 72 virgins? Keep your version of heaven, I'm going someplace without so many freakin musloms. Call it hell if you want but I'll be there without you and the rest of your cult.

Posted by: Ronin at March 22, 2006 9:09 PM

Then the young "pearl-like" boys, what about that, Mo?

'Perfumed Garden' by Abu Nuwas:
O the joy of sodomy!
So now be sodomites, you Arabs.
Turn not away from it--
therein is wondrous pleasure.
Take some coy lad with kiss-curls
twisting on his temple
and ride as he stands like some gazelle
standing to her mate.
A lad whom all can see girt with sword
and belt not like your whore who has
to go veiled.
Make for smooth-faced boys and do your
very best to mount them, for women are
the mounts of the devils

Posted by: Carolyn2 at March 22, 2006 9:18 PM

I think I have it now, on earth you get 4 wives to abuse, in muslim heaven 72. You can not have sex so you get more frustrated than on earth so you need more women. You guys really thought this thing through.

Posted by: Ronin at March 22, 2006 9:18 PM

daveconcerned:

Hazor is a fairly well-known archaeological site internationally--Hugh Firzgerald was aware of it and asked me to refer to Hazor as part of Israel instead of merely as part of Palestine (I was happy to oblige him). There should be plenty of information concerning Hazor and its 3000 year old mosque on most search engines. There is also literature on Hazor as well. I think Serge Trifkovic mentioned it in The Sword of the Prophet (but I am not sure now that I think about it).

One thing is for certain: Islam was NOT big bang in 6th century Saudi Arabia.

Posted by: pythagoras at March 22, 2006 9:34 PM

Mohideen: There is very lttle in any religion that is provable. Now, just because YOU or anyone else accepts Islamic teachings as truth does NOT make them true even if you believe otherwise--BELIEF DOES NOT constitute real knowledge and cannot take the place of actual knowledge. Would you flavor your dinner with arsenic merely because someone TOLD you it would make a great flavoring? (I suspect that you wold not take this in "faith"). Would you spend your life's savings on something because someone TOLD YOU it was would repay itself? If you take someone's word for something there is still no guarantee that it is true. Most people --if they have-- any sense want PROOF to support claims they are asked to invest something in. Islam and shills thereof such as yourself are glaringly unable to fulfill this requirement. Violence is used in Islam where it might have used intelligence....

Muslims can utter all the religious proclamations they want "Christians go to the apparent heaven" bla bla bla. The point here is that Muslims have VIRTUALLY NO PHYSICAL PROOF TO CONFIRM ANYTHING THAT THEY BELIVE IN. AND IN FACT MUCH OF WHAT THE KURAN ASSERTS IS wrong!!!! The Kuran would have us believe the earth is flat! is it? NO!!!! The Kuran tells us that semen is manufactured in the pelvic bone! Is it?? No way. Would I kill somebody because this book tells me that I will go to heaven if I do? GET OUT OF TOWN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'll stick to Christianity. Which at least has a coherent world view (including recognizing that its followers are INDIVIDUALS who think and act autonomously)and does NOT tell me to do crazy (and often terrible) things to people I do not know and who have done nothing to hurt me.

Posted by: pythagoras at March 22, 2006 9:52 PM

patriot2 I think humor is lost on old mo's faithful but I laughed. pythagoras give up on mohideen the fact that he stays for all this abuse shows he has pains with islam. He is ready to come to the light. Once he converts he will make a great Christain. Now we need to work on Naseem.

Posted by: Ronin at March 22, 2006 10:04 PM

Reconcile those statements for adults Mohideen....
Posted by: Caroline at March 22, 2006 08:35 PM

A non-Muslim adult has full freedom: the adult could continue to live as a non-Muslim or become a Muslim.

A Muslim adult must live as a Muslim only.

We said Islam is a one way street. An adult who has not entered the one way street has the full freedom to either keep away or to enter. However, once an adult has entered a one way street, that adult must continue on the permitted direction only.

Let us consider a physical example. An individual who has not learnt to read has the option to remain unread or exert and learn to read. Can an individual who has learnt to read unlearn? The Holy Quran is the book authored by God Almighty. You have either read it or not read it. Anyone who has not read it has the freedom to remain unread or read the book. How can someone who has read the book claim that she / he have not read it?

Another example: a female who has not become a mother might remain so, or become a mother. Can a female who has become a mother revert back to a state of being a non-mother?

Do not come to Islam unless you understand that it is a one way street. Once you have entered Islam, you have no permission – in an Islamic country – of leaving Islam.

Of course in a non-Muslim country anything goes.

Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at March 22, 2006 10:20 PM

Archimedes:

It's nice to know that some of us still believe in sitting down to read complex documents like a country's constitution! The following articles may also play a role in this case:

Article 129 [Legal Reasoning, Capital Punishment]
(1) The court is obliged to state the reasons for the decision it issues.
(2) All specific decisions of the courts are enforceable, except for capital punishment, which is conditional upon approval of the President.

Article 130 [Judicial Discretion]
(1) While processing the cases, the courts apply the provisions of this Constitution and other laws.
(2) When there is no provision in the Constitution or other laws regarding ruling on an issue, the courts' decisions shall be within the limits of this Constitution in accord with the Hanafi jurisprudence and in a way to serve justice in the best possible manner."
-----------------------

and Mohideen, asalaamulaikum!
but tell me this brother:

where in the Quran does it say that you,**or any other human being**, has the right to judge another person as not being a Muslim?

this person has already stated 1)that he believes in God, and 2)that he is not an apostate.

Posted by: jehana at March 22, 2006 10:21 PM

Mohideen,

The man in question, in the topic of this thread, is not a child.

The Hadith you cite refers to a woman converting a child to Judaism. Mohammad has one set of policies for Muslims, and another set of policies for non-Muslims. That last part "truth stands out clear from error" means Islam is the truth that stands out clear from error and that, at least in the context of that Hadith, no one should be compelled away from the truth (Islam). Being converted to Judaism is compulsion away from Islam. Mohammad has a problem with that, but he doesn't, anywhere in the Koran, have a problem with compelling people toward Islam. Neither does Allah (does the phrase "come willingly or unwillingly" sound familiar?). "Belief" in Islam is not simply belief in the existence of Allah. Even Satan believes Allah exists. It means submission, surrender, obedience.

49:14 The wandering Arabs say: We believe. Say (unto them, O Muhammad): Ye believe not, but rather say "We submit," for the faith hath not yet entered into your hearts. Yet, if ye obey Allah and His messenger, He will not withhold from you aught of (the reward of) your deeds. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.
49:15 The (true) believers are those only who believe in Allah and His messenger and afterward doubt not, but strive with their wealth and their lives for the cause of Allah. Such are the sincere.
49:16 Say (unto them, O Muhammad): Would ye teach Allah your religion, when Allah knoweth all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth, and Allah is Aware of all things?
49:17 They make it a favour unto thee (Muhammad) that they have surrendered (unto Him). Say: Deem not your Surrender a favour unto me; but Allah doth confer a favour on you, inasmuch as He hath led you to the Faith, if ye are earnest.

Submit, obey, strive with your wealth and your lives in the cause of Allah (i.e., to make Allah's religion dominant, supreme, victorious over all religions and to destroy all polytheism and disbelief no matter how much the disbelievers may be averse), surrender, Allah conferred a favour unto you in leading you to Islam...sounds like compulsion to me...

Here's some more...

4:77 Hast thou not seen those unto whom it was said: Withhold your hands, establish worship and pay the poordue, but when fighting was prescribed for them behold! a party of them fear mankind even as their fear of Allah or with greater fear, and say: Our Lord! Why hast Thou ordained fighting for us ? If only Thou wouldst give us respite yet a while! Say (unto them, O Muhammad): The comfort of this world is scant; the Hereafter will be better for him who wardeth off (evil); and ye will not be wronged the down upon a date-stone.

But no compulsion in religion.

Posted by: Archimedes at March 22, 2006 10:30 PM

I think it is very apparent that Mohideen is not going to address issues here that he is uncomfortable with. He's going to continue to talk in circles and isn't going to address the obvious inconsistencies with his religion.

As for his initial post:

"I pity the poor soul who has not used the chance to revert to Islam. A real pity."

No, Mohideen, Abdul Rahman is not to be pitied, because he has the strength of the Almighty God within him, and regardless of what his fate will be in this life, he will receive the crown of life in the next. It does not take any amount of strength or fortitude to follow the flock and do what others tell you to do. Abdul Rahman is a man to be looked upon with admiration for his courage.

You, on the other hand, are to be pitied.

Posted by: yohannbiimu at March 22, 2006 10:36 PM

mohideen at last my friend we can agree on something. Islam is a one way street. BTW, I did read the koran but an English version. I didn't get a warm and fuzzy from it. Once I learn a little more Arabic I will read it again. How many times must I read it before I start to believe it? I read Tom Sawyer four times but I still do not believe it, liked it though. Now that we are friends and all let me ask you a serious question. You should be able to understand we non muslims would be resistant to change so I ask you. How does it make you feel when we are so strongly opposed to even giving it a try? At any point do you attempt to view this from our perspective?

Posted by: Ronin at March 22, 2006 10:38 PM

Caroline wrote that "The cognitive dissonance must be so great I'm surprised it doesn't produce widespread spontaneous human head combustion in the Muslim population."

Oh but it does, all day long.

Posted by: Television at March 22, 2006 10:43 PM

jehana,

Thanks. I did cite (but did not quote) Article 129. You posted what I was about to post next, re Article 130. There may be some difference of treatment depending on whether or not Rahman was originally Shia or Sunni. If he was Sunni (which is probable), I guess the Hanafi jurisprudence would be applied (at least according to article 130). But if he was Shia, Shia jurisprudence would be applied (Article 131). The Hanafi interpretation does not call for the death penalty in cases of simple apostacy (see below)*. For the death penalty to be applied, there has to be some other serious criminal actions that accompany the apostacy (e.g., some sort of combative or violent activity, etc.). On the other hand, the bits that I've read about the Shia interpretation suggest that the death penalty is to be applied even for simple apostacy. There are, of course, a wide variety of opinions on this issue within and between schools.

This case highlights once again two of the key areas where reform is needed: Penalties for leaving Islam and/or being critical of Islam need to be dropped, removed completely.

*
http://www.alislam.org/books/apostacy/17.html
"...We have just shown that leading jurists of the Hanafi school held to the position to which we adhere, that simple apostacy is not punishable with death. It is only a fighting apostate who is subject to that penalty on account of his rebellion or treason and not on account of his apostacy."

[That is consistent with Koran, 4:89-91, though that passage does not forbid the death penalty for simple apostacy. Rather, it grants permission to kill apostates who are combative and who are not protected by peace treaty].

*
http://www.answers.com/topic/apostasy-in-islam
"Mirza Tahir Ahmed (Murder in the name of Allah, Lutterworth Press 1989, ISBN 0718828054), the spiritual leader of the Ahmadis, a self proclaimed Muslim sect, but enforced into apostasy by being declared non-Muslims in many Muslim countries, concludes his book by "Apostasy which is not aggravated by some other crime is not punishable in this world. This is the teaching of God. This was the teaching of the Holy Prophet. This is the view confirmed by Hanafi jurists,26 Fateh al-Kadeer27 Chalpi,28 Hafiz ibn Qayyim, Ibrahim Nakhai, Sufyan Thauri and many others. The Maududian claim of consensus, concerning the tradition they hold to be true [i.e., that apostacy itself is punished with execution], is a mere fiction."

[Nevertheless, Maududi's argument that 9:11-9:14 could be interpreted as permission to kill apostates (who have broken their oaths and have gone against Islam) is compelling. It also does not require great leaps of interpretation to put together 9:73-74 "...Allah will doom them (hypocrites and apostates) in this world..." and 9:14's "...fight them and Allah will punish them at your hands..." (Also see 8:17, those non-Muslims slain in battle by Muslims were slain by Allah). This is effectively giving Muslims permission to punish the apostates and disbelievers with death. Fight them, for al-Fitnah (polytheism, disbelief) is worse than killing 2:191, 2:217; fight them until there is no more fitnah and all religion is for Allah 2:193, 8:39; conquer all religions no matter how much the disbelievers may hate this process 9:33, 48:28, 61:9. See 5:32-33, re mischief/corruption which receives the death penalty, and 33:60-62 where hypocrisy and spreading false news/sedition are each given the death penalty. Taking verses such as these into account, it must be admitted that the Koran itself provides grounds for inferring a death penalty for apostacy].

Posted by: Archimedes at March 22, 2006 11:25 PM

Mohideen- Islam is a cancer on the face of the earth.

Coercion and manipulation are at the root of Islam- not peace and love.

What motivates Muslims to threaten death to any Muslim who abandons his faith?

Answer: Violent religious teachings that are found in Muslim texts.

Well, let's take a look........

Sura II.217 reads: “… But whoever of you recants and dies an unbeliever , his works shall come to nothing in this world and the next, and they are the companions of the fire for ever.”

Koran XVI.106, “Whoso disbelieveth in Allah after his belief –save him who is forced thereto and whose heart is still content with the Faith but whoso findeth ease in disbelief: On them is wrath from Allah. Theirs will be an awful doom.”

Koran III.90-91, “Lo! those who disbelieve after their (profession of) belief, and afterward grow violent in disbelief, their repentance will not be accepted.

Islam is an insecure faith that creates fear in its members if they want to become an apostate.

MIND CONTROL is at the heart of Islam- not the divinity of God.

Posted by: Johnathan at March 22, 2006 11:36 PM

thanks, patriot.

Posted by: jehana at March 23, 2006 12:10 AM

I know that most posters here know, but for those who think that RAHMAN is an isolated case, here is the bigger picture...

: March 22, 2006
CHRISTIAN FREEDOM INTERNATIONAL
CONTACT: Vickie Koth, 540-636-8907

FRONT ROYAL, VIRGINIA --- In a letter to President Bush, Christian Freedom International urged for the immediate release of Abdur Rahman, a man who is in prison for his faith in Afghanistan. Rahman faces the death penalty because he converted to Christianity.

"Unfortunately, this is not an isolated incident," said Christian Freedom International President Jim Jacobson. "The persecution of Christians is an increasing, unintended consequence of the War on Terror. Minority Christians face severe and growing persecution in many Islamic nations including Indonesia, Bangladesh, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and elsewhere. This must be condemned at the highest levels wherever and whenever it occurs."

"The arrest and imprisonment of Mr. Rahman for converting to Christianity is a cause of major concern for all freedom-loving people, but it is the tip of the iceberg," said Jacobson. "His case is one of the few times in recent history the 'mainstream media' actually covered a story on Christian persecution."

"While we want Mr. Rahman to go free, there are thousands of other persecuted Christians in Islamic nations just like him," said Jacobson. "Becoming a Christian should not be considered a crime in Afghanistan or elsewhere."

Posted by: DhimmiNot at March 23, 2006 12:15 AM

Check this out Mo,
http://www.meforum.org/article/104
A lot of muslims are finding the truth.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at March 23, 2006 12:35 AM

From the article above "Christianity is life, Islam is death."

Posted by: Carolyn2 at March 23, 2006 12:37 AM

Here is another violent text from the Quran that really ought to be terminated:

Quran 47:
SHAKIR: So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates. That (shall be so); and if Allah had pleased He would certainly have exacted what is due from them, but that He may try some of you by means of others; and (as for) those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will by no means allow their deeds to perish.

Posted by: Johnathan at March 23, 2006 1:06 AM

I don't mean to be a nuisance, but the word is spelled "apostasy", not "apostacy".

Posted by: Television at March 23, 2006 2:01 AM

Qur’an 56:33 “Unending, and unforbidden, exalted beds, and maidens incomparable. We have formed them in a distinctive fashion and made them virgins, loving companions matched in age, for the sake of those of the right hand.”
Posted by: Carolyn2 at March 22, 2006 09:09 PM

The site http://www.searchtruth.com/ has the translations of the Holy Quran by Yusuf Ali, Shakir, Pickthall, and Mohsin Khan. Let us consider the translation by Yusuf Ali first.

The translation of Verses 7 to 26 of Chapter 56 of the Holy Quran is given below:

7 And ye shall be sorted out into three classes.
8 Then (there will be) the Companions of the Right Hand;- What will be the Companions of the Right Hand?
9 And the Companions of the Left Hand,- what will be the Companions of the Left Hand?
10 And those Foremost (in Faith) will be Foremost (in the Hereafter).
11 These will be those Nearest to Allah.
12 In Gardens of Bliss:
13 A number of people from those of old,
14 And a few from those of later times.
15 (They will be) on Thrones encrusted (with gold and precious stones),
16 Reclining on them, facing each other.
17 Round about them will (serve) youths of perpetual (freshness),
18 With goblets, (shining) beakers, and cups (filled) out of clear-flowing fountains:
19 No after-ache will they receive therefrom, nor will they suffer intoxication:
20 And with fruits, any that they may select:
21 And the flesh of fowls, any that they may desire.
22 And (there will be) Companions with beautiful, big, and lustrous eyes,-
23 Like unto Pearls well-guarded.
24 A Reward for the deeds of their past (life).
25 Not frivolity will they hear therein, nor any taint of ill,-
26 Only the saying, "Peace! Peace".

Where is the issue of sex in the above 20 Verses?

Let us continue with the translation of Verses 27 to 40.

27 The Companions of the Right Hand,- what will be the Companions of the Right Hand?
28 (They will be) among Lote-trees without thorns,
29 Among Talh trees with flowers (or fruits) piled one above another,-
30 In shade long-extended,
31 By water flowing constantly,
32 And fruit in abundance.
33 Whose season is not limited, nor (supply) forbidden,
34 And on Thrones (of Dignity), raised high.
35 We have created (their Companions) of special creation.
36 And made them virgin - pure (and undefiled), -
37 Beloved (by nature), equal in age,-
38 For the Companions of the Right Hand.
39 A (goodly) number from those of old,
40 And a (goodly) number from those of later times.

See the difference between the treatment given to the Foremost and the Companions of the Right Hand. The Foremost are served by attendants; the Companions of the Right Hand pick the fruits themselves from the trees. Again, where is the sex involved? How can a virgin pure companion be virgin pure if sex is allowed?

We appeal to you not to ascribe your imaginations to the Holy Quran and criticize Islam.

Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at March 23, 2006 5:05 AM

We could quote the other translations as well. However, the interested may read the other translations from http://www.searchtruth.com/ and convince himself / herself that there is no sex in Heaven. Just because there is a wife in Heaven does not imply sex in Heaven.

Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at March 23, 2006 5:07 AM

"We appeal to you not to ascribe your imaginations to the Holy Quran and criticize Islam. "

What is wrong with contructive criticism?

Besides I see a lot of contradictions here being presented. Because from what I hear, the teaching of the 72 virgins is taught bigtime.

There is nothing wrong with contructive criticism when it is an issue of contradictions.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at March 23, 2006 5:40 AM

As I mentioned earlier, poor Mohideen is not going to deal with the real issues here, but rather just imagining that he is. I thought we had gotten past the "sex in heaven issue," but he obviously cannot.

The issue, Mohideen, is your religion that compels those of other faiths to submit to your religion of oppression, hatred, and death. Your religion has historically beaten down all matter of progress and culture where it has been infested, to the point that people are willing to kill themselves "for it," rather than live in the hell of the squaller that has resulted from it.

Islam is a disease and an infestation. It is a problem that is in serious need of FIXING, and you do not want to admit that.

Posted by: yohannbiimu at March 23, 2006 6:20 AM

Mohideen, asalaamulaikum!
but tell me this brother:
where in the Quran does it say that you,**or any other human being**, has the right to judge another person as not being a Muslim?
this person has already stated 1)that he believes in God, and 2)that he is not an apostate.
Posted by: jehana at March 22, 2006 10:21 PM

Dear sister Jehana,

Assalaamu Alaikum Wa Rahmathullahi.

I do not desire to become a judge with respect to Abdul Rahman, the Christian. All I would say is that the religion of Islam is different from Christianity. So, if any claims that a Christian is as good as a Muslim, refutes the very purpose of the act of sending Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, as a Prophet by Allah.

Don’t we agree that when the author of a book publishes a new edition of the book, we treat the latest edition as the correct one? In the case of the Prophets, peace be upon them, every one of them were given extracts from the same book with Allah SWT so that there can be no inconsistency between their Messages. Our position with respect to the New Testament is that it is a version written by the victorious Romans after Allah took Prophet Jesus, son of Mary, peace be upon them, to the Heaven without crucifying him. It is our interpretation that one of the disciples of Prophet Jesus, son of Mary, peace be upon them, got himself crucified in place of Prophet Jesus, son of Mary, peace be upon them, was resurrected by Prophet Jesus, son of Mary, peace be upon them, and was hanged by the Romans after the ascension of Prophet Jesus, son of Mary, peace be upon them to Heaven, and was accused of pointing out Prophet Jesus, son of Mary, peace be upon them after hanging him, and twisted the Message brought by Prophet Jesus, son of Mary, peace be upon them.

Wasn’t the Roman emperor considered to be a son of God? Does it sound unreasonable to think that the Roman emperor reduced the dignity of Prophet Jesus, son of Mary, peace be upon them, by calling him son of God to be on par with himself? Given the assertion by Allah SWT in 4:157 quoted from http://www.searchtruth.com/search.php?keyword=crucified+Jesus&chapter=&translator=2&search=1&start=0&records_display=10&search_word=all
===
That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah.;- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-
( سورة النساء , An-Nisa, Chapter #4, Verse #157) (Yusuf Ali translation)
===
do we have any doubt that Prophet Jesus, peace be upon him (after his descent in future) would be the enemy of the like of Abdul Rahman, the Christian?

If Abdul Rahman, the Christian remains a Muslim, he would not claim as he has done. Is believing in Prophet Jesus, son of Mary, peace be upon them, and not believing in Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, (though Abdul Rahman, the Christian does not state his refusal of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him explicitly) make Abdul Rahman, the Christian place him outside the fold of Islam? If he is not an apostate, who is?

Having said the above, I conclude by quoting from http://www.searchtruth.com/searchHadith.php?keyword=kafir+true&translator=4&search=1&book=&start=0&records_display=10&search_word=all
===
Malik related to me from Abdullah ibn Dinar from Abdullah ibn Umar that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "If a man says to his muslim brother, 'O kafir!' it is true about one of them." (Book #56, Hadith #56.1.1) (Malik’s Muwatta)
===

I leave the judgment on Abdul Rahman, the Christian to Allah SWT.

Posted by: Mohideen Ibramsha at March 23, 2006 6:29 AM

Mohideen: "Do not come to Islam unless you understand that it is a one way street. Once you have entered Islam, you have no permission – in an Islamic country – of leaving Islam."

As noted above, children born to Muslim parents who are dependent upon those parents for food and sustenance are not "free" to decide not to become Muslim, not unless they wish to be disowned and left as children to fend for themselves. And as you have pointed out, once one has entered Islam (at puberty) one has no permission to leave (should be killed even as you stated earlier). Hence YES Mohideen, there IS compulsion in Islam. For you to deny that fact is to rob the word "compulsion" of any meaning.

Posted by: Caroline at March 23, 2006 7:05 AM

The issue, Mohideen, is your religion that compels those of other faiths to submit to your religion of oppression, hatred, and death. Your religion has historically beaten down all matter of progress and culture where it has been infested, to the point that people are willing to kill themselves "for it," rather than live in the hell of the squaller that has resulted from it.

Islam is a disease and an infestation. It is a problem that is in serious need of FIXING, and you do not want to admit that.

Posted by: yohannbiimu at March 23, 2006 8:11 AM

Mohideen, you have some problems with your argument: You said "so that there can be no inconsistency between their Messages." The Quran says Jesus Christ (Isa) is a prophet. Yet Jesus Christ prophesied His own death on the cross and His resurrection from the grave. If Jesus Christ was correct in His prophecy of His death on the cross, (which h