Normal Islam or Backwards interpretation? (Muslim->Christian in Afghanistan)

[rb]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4823874.stm

Is this normal - is this what the Koran says and is it the 'norm" in other islamic countries?

[laptop-tech]

quote from the text...

"We will invite him again because the religion of Islam is one of tolerance. We will ask him if he has changed his mind. If so we will forgive him," the judge told the BBC on Monday.

But if he refused to reconvert, then his mental state would be considered first before he was dealt with under Sharia law, the judge added.

[rb]

quote from the text...

"We will invite him again because the religion of Islam is one of tolerance. We will ask him if he has changed his mind. If so we will forgive him," the judge told the BBC on Monday.

But if he refused to reconvert, then his mental state would be considered first before he was dealt with under Sharia law, the judge added.

But if he refuses to convert and he's deemed mentally stable - he's a dead man isn't he?

[laptop-tech]

But if he refuses to convert and he's deemed mentally stable - he's a dead man isn't he?

I highlighted the word tolerance in sarcasm...its just funny that some people demand "freedom of religion" and even twist the legal system in Canada, while they stone to death those who choose not to adopt Islam.

[PrimoTurbo]

Freedom of religion is stupid, it means its okay to discriminate by following a certain part of the religion.

For example the treatment of gays, based on the Bible.

[asim99]

But if he refuses to convert and he's deemed mentally stable - he's a dead man isn't he?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam

[laptop-tech]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam

quote from the link above :

"Legal opinion on apostasy by a Fatwa committee concerning the case of a man who converted to Christianity: "Since he left the Islam, he will be invited to express his regret. If he does not regret, he will be killed pertaining to rights and obligations of the Islamic law."

[mookieflookie]

Why do so many Christians pretend to go and help Afghans when they really have a hidden agenda? No wonder why nobody wants Christian charities in their countries. Most Christians are probably reasonable and helpful, but then you have these crazy ones with a sick imagination about converting the world.

[xKagex]

Why do so many Christians pretend to go and help Afghans when they really have a hidden agenda? No wonder why nobody wants Christian charities in their countries. Most Christians are probably reasonable and helpful, but then you have these crazy ones with a sick imagination about converting the world.

Obviously people who are Christians think they are doing people an invaluable favour by teaching them about Christianity. There's no hidden agenda; evangelism is part of the Christian faith.

[laptop-tech]

[poedua]

From today's Globe.....in some places, it seems it's illegal to be a Christian ......better hide that Bible!!!!!

"The judge deciding whether an Afghan man should be executed for converting to Christianity does not understand what all the fuss is about.

"In this country, we have [a] perfect constitution. It is Islamic law and it is illegal to be a Christian and it should be punished," Judge Alhaj Ansarullah Mawawy Zada said in an interview yesterday. "In your country, two women can marry. I think that is very strange."

"It is a crime to convert to Christianity from Islam. He is teasing and insulting his family by converting," Judge Zada said. "The Attorney-General is emphasizing he should be hung."

...what can you say.???..religious freedom means different things to different people. One of the reasons I like Canada.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...rnational/home

[hagbard]

I'd respond but you're on my "ignore list". Given your past posts, I'll just say I disagree entirely with everything you said and leave it at that.

[asim99]

I'd respond but you're on my "ignore list". Given your past posts, I'll just say I disagree entirely with everything you said and leave it at that.

haha

[go leafs]

even michelle malkin and other conservative bloggers are calling out Bush & Karzai about this
http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004808.htm

here is a good quote (from a conservative organization I think)

The Bush administration assured us late last year that the new Iraqi constitution would not threaten religious liberty. This, despite the provisions saying no law could be passed that was "inconsistent with Islam." Our concern that such promises of religious freedom will be meaningless in light of Islamic law is once again justified by religious persecution in Afghanistan. The Afghan constitution, adopted after America liberated that country from the Taliban, has a provision similar to that of the new Iraqi constitution. Now, we receive a horrifying report of Abdul Rahman, 41, who is on trial for his life in Kabul, Afghanistan. Rahman's crime? He has admitted converting to Christianity. That there should even be such a trial is an outrage.

How can we congratulate ourselves for liberating Afghanistan from the rule of jihadists only to be ruled by Islamists who kill Christians? Such a "trial" is a flagrant violation of Article 18 of the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights--which the current Afghan government even incorporated into its constitution. Article 18 reads: "Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance." President Bush should immediately send Vice President Cheney or Secretary Rice to Kabul to read Hamid Kharzai's government the riot act. Americans will not give their blood and treasure to prop up new Islamic fundamentalist regimes. Democracy is more than purple thumbs.

[asim99]

its interesting how karzai is avoiding this issue