This is not an “extremist” position, or one that is unique to Hizb ut-Tahrir. The death penalty for apostasy is part of Islamic law. It’s based on the Qur’an: “They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah. But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper.” (Qur’an 4:89)
A hadith depicts Muhammad saying: “Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him” (Bukhari 9.84.57). The death penalty for apostasy is part of Islamic law according to all the schools of Islamic jurisprudence.
This is still the position of all the schools of Islamic jurisprudence, both Sunni and Shi’ite. Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the most renowned and prominent Muslim cleric in the world, has stated: “The Muslim jurists are unanimous that apostates must be punished, yet they differ as to determining the kind of punishment to be inflicted upon them. The majority of them, including the four main schools of jurisprudence (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, and Hanbali) as well as the other four schools of jurisprudence (the four Shiite schools of Az-Zaidiyyah, Al-Ithna-‘ashriyyah, Al-Ja’fariyyah, and Az-Zaheriyyah) agree that apostates must be executed.”
Qaradawi also once famously said: “If they had gotten rid of the apostasy punishment, Islam wouldn’t exist today.”
“‘You know what the Islamic position is’: Islamist extremist leader stares down a former Muslim and says he should DIE for renouncing his faith,” by Bryant Hevesi and Sam Duncan, Daily Mail Australia, August 29, 2018 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):
A leader of an Islamist extremist group has stared down a former Muslim while telling him he deserves the death penalty for renouncing his faith.
Hizb ut-Tahrir spokesman Uthman Badar and Harris Sultan faced-off in a fiery debate at the University of New South Wales in Sydney last week.
Mr Sultan pressed Mr Badar on a statement he made in March last year saying Muslims who change their religion should be killed.
‘I want to know what would happen to me. I’m an apostate,’ Mr Sultan said.
‘What would happen to me if it’s not a secular country… it’s an Islamic state.’
Mr Badar said it would depend on individual circumstances, noting Mr Sultan knew ‘what it [the Islamic position] is’.
‘If you want to focus on the Islamic position, we can do that without you coming up with scenarios about what happens to you and making it all about yourself,’ he said.
‘I don’t know what would happen to you. Because you can do so many things.
‘There’s a huge difference between an Islamic position and what may or may not happen in any particular circumstance.’
The debate moderator then asked Mr Badar: ‘As an adherent to Islam, do you share the Islamic position?’
‘Yes,’ he replied.
‘Although it took him four minutes to answer the question… Uthman finally still proudly held his position that apostates should be killed in the Caliphate of Australia,’ Mr Sultan posted alongside a video uploaded to YouTube.
‘In my debate at UNSW he tried to dodge the question but eventually gave in and re-affirmed his position that ex-Muslims like me should be killed,’ he told Daily Mail Australia.
Mr Sultan manages the Ex-Muslim Atheist page on Facebook.
‘I was born a Muslim in Pakistan, I was made to read Quran, while others only read, I understood it as well, that was enough to walk away from it,’ his Facebook page says.
In March last year, Mr Badar told a forum in Bankstown in Sydney’s south-west that ex-Muslims deserved death.
‘The ruling for apostates as such in Islam is clear, that apostates attract capital punishment and we don’t shy away from that,’ Mr Badar said in the presence of children.
HIZB UT-TAHRIR STATEMENT ON APOSTASY
‘The ruling of the Legislator, Allah the Almighty, for apostasy is death, due to the Messenger’s saying:
“Whoever changes his religion, kill him”.’
– From a statement issued by Hizb ut-Tahrir in May 2014 after the US condemned a death sentence given to an apostate by a Sharia court in Sudan
An apostate is someone who decides to leave Islam, but both the definition of apostasy and the Islamic position on it are the subject of debate among Islamic scholars.
There is no clear text in the Quran that calls for apostates to be killed, with that belief stemming from the sayings of the Prophet Muhammad known as the Hadith.
‘If somebody [a Muslim] discards his religion, kill him,’ reads one saying, but others contain examples of unpunished apostasy….
Gigi says
Why it makes it difficult! How do we “tolerate” intolerance? I tend to lean left politically on most things, but radical Islam is not justifiable.
J D S says
It has been stated by high authority in Islam that if the apostasy law had been thrown away then Islam would no longer exist.
GrumpyMel says
You are not judging them based on their “intolerance” you are judging them based on their violation of your basic human rights….. which at it’s most basic level includes your right to exist.
“Intolerance” is thinking you s uck because of a particular aspect they object to, telling you you s uck and maybe refusing to sit next to you on a bus, or something like that.
What they are advocating doing is not intolerance…it’s murder… and on a wider scale genocide.
David Grisez says
Islam is an evil wicked system. The death penalty for Muslim apostates is just another form of murder in this system along with all the other forms of murder in Islam, such as jihad against kaffirs. More reasons that the truth about the Islamic ideology must be exposed, so that nations can respond properly to this ideology. Also we need leaders in the United States who understand the truth about this system, leaders who have a priority of protecting this country and it’s people. As much as the Democrats hate our president, still we have President Donald Trump who understand’s the importance of protecting this country.
Wellington says
The only thing surprising here would be that any adult non-Muslim in the West could still be surprised about this. Unfortunately, heaps and heaps of adult non-Muslims in the West still could be and therein lies the ultimate problem of our times, i.e., not the heinous religion which is Islam but the continuing, completely indefensible, willful ignorance of Islam.
Terry Gain says
On my Facebook Page
“Do Muslims who promote or accept Islamic apostasy laws – which surely all civilized people know are an abomination – have Facebook accounts? The community wants to know.”
Harold says
The unassailable and primary reason that Hizb ut-Tahrir support of the death penalty for leaving Islam is that according to the Pew Research survey on the attitude of Muslims a substantial percentage of Muslims believe in the death penalty for apostasy. The second most important and unassailable reason it is not extreme is that leading Imams at Al-Azhar University and other institutions preach that from the Quran and Hadiths that people should be killed from leaving Islam.
Your average, decent person who has been brainwashed in school reads your quotes from the Quran as the answer, and immediately thinks, “There are violent passages in the Bible, too” Yes, I know the Bible gives and has always understood to be one time commands for violence, and the Quran commands perpetual violence until conquest is complete. However, you need to give the best reasons.
Michael Copeland says
Pew Research’s job is to perform surveys, which can bring interesting results.
For Islam, though, surveys are irrelevant. The wishes or preferences of individual muslims count for nothing and are not consulted. Islam is not a democracy.
“It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger to have any option about their decision:”
Koran 33:36, part of Islamic law
harold says
Michael, I agree that Islam is not a democracy. The issue is how to establish whether or not support for killing apostates is out of the norm. Your average person who listens 99.9% of the time to the dominant left-wing media has been told that those who support “radical Islam” is a teeny percentage and then the media trots out a “moderate” imam who tells us that those “seemingly” violent passages are being distorted by “Islamaphobes”. If you first establish that a majority of Muslims in many countries support killing Apostates, then you have the basis for arguing that the violent passages in fact interpreted as everlasting commands for violence.
Westman says
While violence in the Old Testament is descriptive, within its own period and left behind in the dustbin of history, the Quran’s and Hadith’s calls for violence are largely prescriptive, for all time; particularly death for apostates. This is confirmed by the leading authorities of Sunni “scholars”, who represent approx 90% of Islam.
That there is not more violence from Islam, in the West, is a matter of lukewarm adherents or fear of legal consequences. The violence upon Muslims and unbelievers within Muslim dominated nations, for perceived infractions of Islamic rules, is rampant and considered, “normal”. Is there any reason to suggest this would change if Islam becomes a significant force in the West?
We have an unprecedented seat, from the US, to observe a great irreversible experiment by European leaders, most who have invited the carriers of Islam to share their national assets and a few who have refused.
The Islamic immigrants have made a choice, quite in opposition to EU distribution demands, to go to the countries of best social benefits and highest economic opportunity. We shall observe the results and be able to know, without doubt, if Islam benefits any nation.
Michael Copeland says
It brings the West nothing of value,
It has nothing of value to bring.
Harol says
Westman,
I already made the point in my first post: “Yes, I know the Bible gives and has always understood to be one time commands for violence, and the Quran commands perpetual violence until conquest is complete.”
Don’t you get that the average person who listens to NPR will like a Pavlov Dog, respond “Islamaphobe!” if you just quote the Quran because they have been indoctrinated to believe that Islamaphobes distort the Koran and a teeny percentage of Muslims are fundamentalists and they are no more of a threat than Christian fundamentalists? Prove that a very large percentage of Muslims believe in such things as stoning women for adultery, killing apostates and honor killings, you shatter the myth.
Koosemo says
Islam- an imperial/colonial system which amounts to the most successful fascism in human history to date
Denny Abrahamsson says
Why not have deathpenalties for devoted muslims since they are a threat to humanity.
gravenimage says
If by devoted you mean murderously Jihadist, then I agree.
No Fear says
Hizb ut tahrir agree with the death penalty for apostasy from Islam.
All things being equal, the Hizb ut Tahrir person should have no problem with the converse:
Similarly if a non-muslim leaves the group of non-muslims and joins the group of muslims then the death penalty should apply.
sidney penny says
Killed for leaving Islam
Killed for offending the prophet
Killed for blasphemy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gY9N7iGDRoI
Cat Stevens (Yusuf Islam) condones death fatwa on Salman Rushdie & would kill him personally
In 1989, Cat Stevens [Yusuf Islam] a Muslim convert appeared on a British television program, BBC’s Hypotheticals, an occasional broadcast featuring a panel of notable guests to explore a hypothetical situation with moral, ethical and/or political dilemmas. In the episode (“A Satanic Scenario”), Islam had an exchange about the issue with the moderator and Queens Counsel Geoffrey Robertson.
Robertson: You don’t think that this man deserves to die?
Y. Islam: Who, Salman Rushdie?
Robertson: Yes.
Y. Islam: Yes, yes.
Robertson: And do you have a duty to be his executioner?
Y. Islam: Uh, no, not necessarily, unless we were in an Islamic state and I was ordered by a judge or by the authority to carry out such an act – perhaps, yes.
[Some minutes later, Robertson on the subject of a protest where an effigy of the author is to be burned]
Robertson: Would you be part of that protest, Yusuf Islam, would you go to a demonstration where you knew that an effigy was going to be burned?
Y. Islam: I would have hoped that it’d be the real thing
Earlier on 21 February 1989, Yusuf Islam addressed students at Kingston University in London about his conversion to Islam and was asked about the controversy in the Muslim world and the fatwa calling for Salman Rushdie’s execution. He replied, “He must be killed. The Qur’an makes it clear – if someone defames the prophet, then he must die.”
TKF says
If Islam didn’t force people on pain of death to submit to it’s violent, insane dogma, the whole sham circus would have collapsed years ago.
Gjallarhornet says
In today’s world:
Saying that a muslim leader who says ex-muslims should be killed should be deported, will get you fired, possibly jailed. However, saying that ex-muslims should be killed is just fine.
We have a HUGE mentality problem.
Michael Copeland says
“Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance” –
Barack Obama
Steven says
What??….no protest or no violent protest from the leftists like they always incite the violence in protects against right wing events…..double standard!!!!
dumbledoresarmy says
For me, that’s the ‘deal breaker’.
I think this point – that classical, mainstream Islam prescribes DEATH for apostasy, and that a very, very high percentage of *today’s* Muslims are right on board with that (as shown by the Pew surveys, which probably reveal an ‘at least’ ball-park figure – the real figures might well be higher! – should be enough to ensure that NO identifiable Muslim is ever permitted to enter and settle within any free non-Islamic country.
In what way does a cult that KILLS any adherent who tries to leave , or who actually leaves, differ from a crime ‘family’ such as the Mafia??
And then there’s the Blasphemy Law, with which, also, huge percentages of Muslims are just fine: the idea of KILLING anyone – including *non-adherents* – who dares to criticise or question or make fun of Islam, any aspect thereof, Mohammed, or the atrocious (or just plain bizarre) behaviour of Mohammedan mobsters. Salman Rushdie. Danish cartoon Riots. The hideous cruelty with which Pakistani Christian Asia bibi has been treated… and the multiple cases of non-Musilms, within Islamic countries, being FALSELY accused of ‘blasphemy!!!!” by the Muslim mob and/ or its rabble-rousing clerics, so as to have an excuse to turn loose the howling mobs to kill, rob, burn, rape and destroy. The broad-daylight murder of Theo Van Gogh. The attempt to murder Kurt Westergaard, who created the famous ‘turban-bomb mohammed’ cartoon – it was a Somali Muslim ‘refugee’, stupidly admitted into Denmark, who **broke into Westergaard’s house with an axe and attempted to kill him**. Had that thrice-accursed mohammedan’s sob story been rejected – had he not been admitted into Denmark at all – then Kurt Westergaard could say what he damn well liked and draw what he damn well liked, in perfect safety. And then there is the ghastly, bloody Muslim massacre of the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists. Had NO damned mohammedan mobsters been allowed to enter and settle inside the gates of France, many, many people would be alive, who now are dead.
I have HAD it with playing ‘Muslim roulette’.
*Some* Muslims might not go apesh*t if their hideous cult is criticised or mocked. *Some* Muslims might not hound, beat up, or kill a family member who leaves Islam. But a whole hell of a lot WILL, and DO, **on western soil*. And nobody can tell, beforehand, which ones won’t and which ones will… only that a lot more will, than won’t, and even *one* or *two* doing it, is one or two too many.. one or two that we can damn well do without.
All of us have to try to impress these facts – especially, about the apostasy law and blasphemy law – upon our political and religious leaders, and state loud and clear that we do. not. want people whose cult very actively practises these two principles – DEATH for apostasy, DEATH for ‘blasphemy’ – inside our countries, crushing all freedom of conscience and freedom of speech.. KILLING people.
And as for the fools who think this is all irrelevant because they know some apparently-nice muslim who they think wouldn’t harm a fly.. they just. don’t. know. That same nice Msulim might have a kid who runs off and joins the likes of Islamic State, just like that. That same ‘nice’ Muslim might well be sending money off to some jihad outfit. That same ‘nice’ Muslim might calmly slit the throat of his or her daughter or son… or pay an assassin to do it for them – if said daughter or son left Islam and became a Christian, or a Buddhist, or an atheist. Perfectly possible.
Walter Sieruk says
This alone exposes the large difference between Christianity and Islam. For with Christian mindset if a Christian turns away from Jesus , Christians at their best will pray for him or Christians the worst will shun him. In contrast. withe Muslim mindset ,If a Muslim leaves Islam, Muslims will neither pray for him or shun him. Muslim will literally kill him. The difference in the Christian way of thinking and by contrast the Muslim way of thinking is outstanding.
J.W.K. says
Religion of peace my Aunt Fanny!
Savvy Kafir says
How about this? Any Muslim living in the West who advocates killing apostates should be executed himself.
learning islam says
• Moh fabricated Revelations for his benefits Do not worry, enjoy. As you do these things Allah would conveniently keep on sending me revelations justifying every one of these actions. Pillage, murder, loot, womanise, rape women & children. Allah is there to justify everything. Don’t ask questions lest get killed. Muhammad (May he rot in hell) says, ” 9 year old (Aisha), daughter in law (Zainab), slave girls (Maria), sexsual exploitation/ force-marry war widow (Safiya).
• Xena Warrior9 months ago
pls check muhd got verses 1st from allah.later on he allah changes verses when those verses are conflicting with muhd desires.there several instances in koram where allah as to change verses with new ones for muhd.is allah imperfect?muhd perfect or muhd clever than allah pls read koran from start to end and hadith we dont even have debate the authenticity of quran lying in turkey, cairo museum and the current day koran.
• : meal story, missing Red velvet cloth, under wear story,caught adultery -threatening hafasa, and asha, stoning others, while commiting adultery himself, -hypocrisy,proving ashia’s innocence accused of adultery,required 4 poius witness revelation(Ashia & Sarfan story), marrying dauther in law, 9 years old aisha- his allah sactioned him, and so on on
• Read Quran Surah nisa 4 verse 56 the punishment for the hypocrites.Moh is hypcrite, no punishment from allah for mohd.
Please,GOOGLE
The Funniest Quran Verse (Crazy Quran Verses: 2) U TUBE VIDEO
ANOTHER U-TUBE https://youtu.be/Y_MEQngvheg
The Quran is Mohamed’s personal book ,was reviled to solve his personal issues.
Please Google My Favorite Quran Verse (David Wood)
• Allah’s sole existence is to satisfy Muhammad’s selfish desires. It’s hard to know who’s Allah and who’s Muhammad.
• It’s brilliant. Allah telling people what Muhammad thinks on Muhammads behalf through Muhammad. You couldn’t make it up. Oh hang on a second?. In other words, Mo always got Allah to do his dirty work. Some “prophet”.
• the ‘eternal’ word of God for mankind’s guidance for all time is troubling himself with the present issues of one man who will sòon be dead. How can that be relevant to humanity?
• Surah 33 is probably one of the most disturbing and silly chapters of the Quran. I’m just thankful two-thirds of the chapter were lost.
• (Just imagine this. Muhammad wanted people to leave after they finished their meal, but he did not wanted to say it. But then he said it anyway, except he inserted the words HE wanted to say into the mouth of Allah and said it for him. That is how it sounds like and why its additionally quite ridiculous to consider this the eternal, holy word of God. And then the next line makes it maybe even more clear that this cannot possibly come from God “And when you ask (his wives) for something, ask them from behind a partition. That is purer for your hearts and their hearts.” This Allah is supposed to be the same God who speaks in the Bible, but yet we see a completely different God who expresses himself very differently by sounding more like Muhammad himself
If the Quran really is the final word of Allah and it’s supposed to be applicable and universal until the end of times then why would Allah include such a trivial matter in the Quran? What is a believer in the 21st century supposed to interpret from this passage?
Do you honestly believe that, prior to Creation, Allah knew that his favorite prophet would be annoyed by inconsiderate house guests, and thus solved the problem for him by handing down a “revelation” in the “Mother of all books”, that is preserved on a tablet in heaven??? Doesn’t “God” have something better to do than play toady to a minor Arabian war lord? A child of ten could readily understand that this is MUHAMMAD speaking, with Allah as his convenient puppet.
And what’s this business about not marrying Muhammad’s wives after his death? HOW CRUEL COULD ALLAH BE??? Most of those wives were very young women, already half-living after being given to Muhammad. Surely the LEAST Allah could do was to insure that they had happy, normal lives after the passing of the “prophet”. Here again, this is OBVIOUSLY Muhammad speaking with Allah as his puppet. The “prophet” was SOOO INSECURE and self-absorbed. It never seemed to occur to him that other human beings might have rights of their own – inclyding the right to be free of him and happy.
Why did Muhammad forbid marrying his wives after his death?
Because prophet Muhammad was impotent. Muhammad himself knew that he had no power to be a father. So in second marriage his widows’ had a possibility to be a mother. And this incident would reveal Muhammad’s truth.
So to hide his shame prophet Muhammad gave such order.
Even Ibrahim was not Prophet Muhammad’s son.
Because Maria had a Christian man
When aisha saw ibrahim she told to Muhammad “the son does not resemble you .” In this story Ali killed maria’s man. And sadly we all know that Ibrahim died at the age of two.
What is the Koran, you say? Muhammad says it’s the word of God (Allah), but only he heard it. He monopolized God, because Muslims rely 100% on Muhammad. He monopolized the prophets, by radically altering them in the Koran, thus, they are inventions of Muhammad.
But the other texts, you say? The hadith and sunna are merely supplemental texts, written hundreds of years after Muhammad’s sordid life. No religion except Islam relies 100% on a single man. Islam, what a banal, bloody, hateful mess it is.
Read says
• Allah’s sole existence is to satisfy Muhammad’s selfish desires. It’s hard to know who’s Allah and who’s Muhammad.
• It’s brilliant. Allah telling people what Muhammad thinks on Muhammads behalf through Muhammad. You couldn’t make it up. Oh hang on a second?. In other words, Mo always got Allah to do his dirty work. Some “prophet”.
Sura 33,53
• the ‘eternal’ word of God for mankind’s guidance for all time is troubling himself with the present issues of one man who will sòon be dead. How can that be relevant to humanity?
• Surah 33 is probably one of the most disturbing and silly chapters of the Quran. I’m just thankful two-thirds of the chapter were lost.
• (Just imagine this. Muhammad wanted people to leave after they finished their meal, but he did not wanted to say it. But then he said it anyway, except he inserted the words HE wanted to say into the mouth of Allah and said it for him. That is how it sounds like and why its additionally quite ridiculous to consider this the eternal, holy word of God. And then the next line makes it maybe even more clear that this cannot possibly come from God “And when you ask (his wives) for something, ask them from behind a partition. That is purer for your hearts and their hearts.” This Allah is supposed to be the same God who speaks in the Bible, but yet we see a completely different God who expresses himself very differently by sounding more like Muhammad himself
If the Quran really is the final word of Allah and it’s supposed to be applicable and universal until the end of times then why would Allah include such a trivial matter in the Quran? What is a believer in the 21st century supposed to interpret from this passage?
Do you honestly believe that, prior to Creation, Allah knew that his favorite prophet would be annoyed by inconsiderate house guests, and thus solved the problem for him by handing down a “revelation” in the “Mother of all books”, that is preserved on a tablet in heaven??? Doesn’t “God” have something better to do than play toady to a minor Arabian war lord? A child of ten could readily understand that this is MUHAMMAD speaking, with Allah as his convenient puppet.
And what’s this business about not marrying Muhammad’s wives after his death? HOW CRUEL COULD ALLAH BE??? Most of those wives were very young women, already half-living after being given to Muhammad. Surely the LEAST Allah could do was to insure that they had happy, normal lives after the passing of the “prophet”. Here again, this is OBVIOUSLY Muhammad speaking with Allah as his puppet. The “prophet” was SOOO INSECURE and self-absorbed. It never seemed to occur to him that other human beings might have rights of their own – inclyding the right to be free of him and happy.
Why did Muhammad forbid marrying his wives after his death?
Because prophet Muhammad was impotent. Muhammad himself knew that he had no power to be a father. So in second marriage his widows’ had a possibility to be a mother. And this incident would reveal Muhammad’s truth.
So to hide his shame prophet Muhammad gave such order.
Even Ibrahim was not Prophet Muhammad’s son.
Because Maria had a Christian man
When aisha saw ibrahim she told to Muhammad “the son does not resemble you .”
Please,GOOGLE
The Funniest Quran Verse (Crazy Quran Verses: 2) U TUBE VIDEO
ANOTHER U-TUBE https://youtu.be/Y_MEQngvheg
The Quran is Mohamed’s personal book ,was reviled to solve his personal issues.
In this story Ali killed maria’s man. And sadly we all know that Ibrahim died at the age of two.
What is the Koran, you say? Muhammad says it’s the word of God (Allah), but only he heard it. He monopolized God, because Muslims rely 100% on Muhammad. He monopolized the prophets, by radically altering them in the Koran, thus, they are inventions of Muhammad.
But the other texts, you say? The hadith and sunna are merely supplemental texts, written hundreds of years after Muhammad’s sordid life. No religion except Islam relies 100% on a single man. Islam, what a banal, bloody, hateful mess it is.