Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 157
  1. #101  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    He lives in Germany, he returned for a visit and his parents turned him in. Talk about a red headed step child.
    Wow...did NOT know that. That's just wrong.
  2. #102  
    DEAR HOOVS,

    What you said about urban areas being LESS HOMOENEOUS....is a bit of an oxymoron...you are right...places like NYC, where I grew up and lived for 38 years, is less of everyone being the same... (white bread if you will), yet, it also is......

    much MORE homogeneous, FOR JUST THAT REASON. Diverse groups get on better together, because they know and understand each ohter.

    True, many who have not been to NY or not lived there, may think of it as a very viloent place. Yet, I always felt sfe and I grew up in a VERY racially balanced area, that gave my Sister and I the benifit of growing up "COLORBLIND".

    We were brought up to see how HOMOGENEOUS NYC and all peoples are so much the same. We were also taught to learn and celebrate the differences.

    I would not EVER want to have grown up or to rasie children in any other enviornment.

    In fact, if it wasn't fior health reasosn, I would still be living not just in NYC, but in the saem hosue that my folk's bought when I was 6 months old and that I bought when I was 24 and that I lived in until the day after my 38th birthday.

    Just to show you how well "BLENDED" the area I lived in was, the man who owned the property that my house was built on, was the son of a freed slave, whose father built the hosue 100 % by hand nd 100% by himself, and ran a duck farm, in the middle of NYC!!!!

    When he was getting on in years, he reduced the size of the duck farm and my house along 7 others were built along side of the reduced sized duck farm. His son took over the duck farm and ran it until I was in my early teens, when he retired. His great grandchild is the 4 generation to live in that same house.

    What a great childhood I had, can you imagine, where would I have learned 1st hand about slavery, as a white jewish NYer, but from Mr. Caine sr, who was well over 100, when I was a kid?

    Perhaps the issue of living together, gives NYer's a sense of Liberalism, from our tollerence of each other.

    Take care, Jay
    Please Support Research into Fibromyalgia, Chronic Pain and Spinal Injuries. If You Suffer from These, Consider Joining or Better Yet Forming a Support Group. No One Should Suffer from the Burden of Chronic Pain, Jay M. S. Founder, Leesburg Fibromyalgia/Resources Group
  3. #103  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Redbelt, you normally bring rational input to situations such as these. Do you have any information to help us understand why a person would be put to death because he chose to not follow a particular religion?
    Um.. Hi!
    I've been away for a while.. and.. I think I have some reading to do to catch up!
    gimmie time
  4. #104  
    OK, I don't see the topic staying at the Afghan man thing, and I am sorry to say I can't really provide an informative opinion as I know very little about such cases. But if you don't mind an informed guess... umm...
    I think that it is said that people who abandon islam are to be killed. Not as a penelty, but to avoid this snowballing and causing a stir or a break between the muslims. I think that the person in question is put to trial, where they debate the matter and prove whatever he disputed. Should he remember, accept or understand what is said and returns, then all good. Should he not, well... tough luck.
    As a practice.. this is not erm... practiced.. Except maybe in Saudi. Anyhow, I am not sure of how correct this is..
    On one hand, Islam does mean that you believe in the religion willingly, else its useless.
    So, from that point of view.. killing a person for changing belief shouldn't be logical.
    On the other hand, scholars may have adapted this based on a situation in history:
    When the prophet PBUH passed away, a faction reverted from islam (as if they were worshipping the prophet and not god) and waged war. And to stop the country from going into anarchy, they were fought and controlled. That is maybe why this ruling occured.

    For thoes who forgot: THIS IS A GUESS. I do not know for sure. I'll try to ask and get back to you.

    Hope I helped (feels like I messed up the discussion ^_^;
  5. #105  
    Quote Originally Posted by redbelt
    Hope I helped (feels like I messed up the discussion ^_^;
    Every little bit helps. I personally look forward to what you are able to find out from your side of the pond!
  6. #106  
    UPDATE

    HA! A lack of evidence? The man said so, his family said so.

    Abdul Wakil Omeri, a spokesman for the Supreme Court, confirmed that the case had been dismissed because of 'problems with the prosecutors' evidence.' He said several of Rahman's family members have testified that the 41-year-old has mental problems. 'It is the job of the attorney general's office to decide if he is mentally fit to stand trial,' he told AP.
    He converted to Christianity because he's mentally ill. How very chic. Right out of the Leftist playbook.

    Muslim clerics had threatened to incite Afghans to kill Rahman if the government freed him. They said he clearly violated Islamic Shariah law by rejecting Islam.
    Something tells me this may be the governments trump card. They release him, with a wink and a nod, let the clerics kill him.
  7. #107  
    Quote Originally Posted by redbelt
    Hope I helped (feels like I messed up the discussion ^_^;
    Not at all. In fact, you may have helped to get it back on topic. But, with all due respect, I think you're misinformed. Aside from Afghanistan the governments of Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Iran, to name a few, all officially recognize the death penalty for conversion from Islam. Pakistan and Indonesia, while not officially allowing for the death penalty for converts from Islam, have provinces that do allow this practice. Forced conversion to Islam is not only the practice but the law in the Sudan. And these are just examples of government sanctioned activity. If you want to talk about what individual tribes and families do then we're in a whole different ballpark. Its been reported that in tribal areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan Aid workers were "skinned alive" primarily because they are believed to be missionaries.

    Please, don't believe me. A simple Google search will provide ample support for my claims.
  8. #108  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    A lack of evidence? The man said so, his family said so.
    Is it lack of evidence or lack of opportunity to act like they normally should have due to the whole world watching? This is not a pointed jab, but rather a serious question.
  9. #109  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Is it lack of evidence or lack of opportunity to act like they normally should have due to the whole world watching? This is not a pointed jab, but rather a serious question.
    Rahman told a preliminary hearing two weeks ago he had become a Christian while working for an aid group helping Afghan refugees in Pakistan 15 years ago.

    He later lived in Germany before returning to Afghanistan. Source
    But then again, maybe one really has to be mentally ill to admit a conversion to Christianity in Afghanistan...
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  10. #110  
    Quote Originally Posted by redbelt
    I think that it is said that people who abandon islam are to be killed. Not as a penelty, but to avoid this snowballing
    If it is done to prevent snowballing, then you guys do not seem to be too convinced about the positive effects of your religion...

    It's a bit like the veil story, which apparently serves as a protection for the women - if that is the case, we really should worry about Muslim men, who seem to have troubles controlling themselves when seeing women without veils...

    I wonder what some converted Christians like Cat Stevens say about the death penalty for converted Muslims, whether they agree with the practice, and advocate the same for people who switch to Muslim from Christian...
    Last edited by clulup; 03/27/2006 at 03:42 AM.
    “Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.” (Philip K. ****)
  11. #111  
    Quote Originally Posted by clulup
    If it is done to prevent snowballing, then you guys do not seem to be too convinced about the positive effects of your religion...

    It's a bit like the veil story, which apparently serves as a protection for the women - if that is the case, we really should worry about Muslim men, who seem to have troubles controlling themselves when seeing women without veils...

    I wonder what some converted Christians like Cat Stevens say about the death penalty for converted Muslims, whether they agree with the practice, and advocate the same for people who switch to Muslim from Christian...
    Hi clulup,
    well, if you wanna go to women, that is a whole new subject. If you wanna discuss it I would suggest you start a new thread so this wouldn't get confusing. I would strongly suggest reading here: http://www.islamtomorrow.com/women

    as for former muslims and what should be done, I did a quick search and found your exact answer in Islamonline.net.
    The followinng is a shortened transelated version of what was there:

    Q: Suppose I get into Islam, then I didn't agree with some of the rules or such and wanted to revert to my former religion. Why should I be killed? Don't you say that no one is to force anyone in religion? Why are you forcing people to stay in your religion?

    A:
    That is a question that have long puzzled me as I studied this great religion, and I myself have asked myself this question. This had led me to read more on the subject, opinions and referances from the Quran or Sunnah. My studies have ended with a conclusion that I find to be very logical & clear.
    I have since published my study in this website under "Islam and Modern Issues". I hereby present a summery:

    1) When we speak about muslims leaving this faith, it is a big error to generlize or to be vague. As we are talking about lives and blood. Our religion have tought us to deal very very carefully in such issues.

    2) The main issue here is: has the person got out FROM Islam, or has he got out ON Islam?

    3) We will qoute texts that pointed to this difference in point No.5. Death would be to thoes who got out ON Islam meaning to harm, to mess up with the religion, to endanger the saftey of the people or the nation's system, not to mention that it is regarded a crime against the rulers of the nation and on the rules of the religion that the nation beleives in (If that nation was muslim). This would then be regarded as "Grand Treason". The same penelty is adapted for such crimes even in countries that were not based on a religious order.

    4) Texts have shown that, "getting out from Islam" should be very different from "Getting out ON Islam". A person "Getting out From Islam", in an individual manner, where no direspect is shown, does not pose a threat to the Nation or Religion, is not ment to manipulate the feelings or rituals of the muslims and its only reason that this person does not believe in Islam and believes in another system; he then may leave in peace and solditude. Such a person should not be killed, he has the freedom of choice so long as this acts harms no one.

    5) From the texts and evidence where this seperation is justified, and that a reason that an ex-muslim to be killed only when this person rises against his former religion, is the following:

    (I will try to shorten this, I got work to do y'know! -Redbelt)

    *An Arab have declared himself a muslim infront of the prophet, he then got sick and wanted to leave, so he came to the prophet and asked him to cancel what he did. The prophet refused. he asked three times and the prophet refused. So the Arab went up and left by himself leaving the city and religion.
    From here we notice that not every person that leaves Islam is to be killed.

    *A faction of people decided to "Get" into islam for a period of time then leave the religion saying things against it, in a bid to lure the ignorant or simple minded to do the same (as in: Surely they saw something wrong in the religion so they left).

    *Best examples were the "Ridda Wars" (Which I pointed earlier-RedBelt) when several people reverted from Islam, and several False Prophets rose to capitlize on the occasion. An act that they did with the intention to work against and harm Islam and the Muslims.

    * A Prophet saying was: "The blood of a muslim can not be spilt unless by three; a married adulturer; a killer; and thoes who left the religion and left the group". The phrase "And left the group" indicates that a person is no longer from a community and the intention to harm (This may have been lost in transelation but that sentance is correct- Redbelt).
    Therefore, "thoes who left the religion " does not warrent death, but that needs also the person to have "left the group".

    * Ibn Taimia have pointed out in one of his books that The prophet have accepted a bunch of people who left Islam back into Islam again. While he ordered others to be excuted as they did not merly leave the religion, but have collected offences of harm towards Islam and Muslims (Example, the execution of Muqis bin Habbaba, as his act of leaving Islam included killing a muslim and stealing money)

    *Death for thoes going out ON Islam is not concidered a necessarry penelty obliged by Islam (In the opinion of many scholars). Penelties can be obligitory (a HADD), or left to the ruler or person in charge (Taazeery). A taazeery penelty is the preferred or suggested penelty for the offence in question, however the ruler of the country (or anyone acting in his name, eg: a judge) can substitute it with another should he see it is for the best.

    This is the summery of the study, ye who wants more should reverts back to the original study.

    Consultant: Dr. Kamal Almasry on Islamonline.net

    End qoute.

    Well, this makes more sense. It further solidifies my opinion that This religion is correct, while some f***ed up people aren't.
    Some guys remember how I said Bin-Laden & his men focus very narrowly on one aspect and leave big aspects of Islam? When the Afghani's kill that man (totally disregarding all what I qouted) They are being totally narrow minded about it! That is how Taliban used to operate, that is also how Bin-Laden gathers followers, and to a certain extent, Iran.

    Goodness, all I did was search on google, how can terrorists kill and murder in my religion's name without ABC's of what they'r doing? damn criminals.

    Well guys.. does this make more sense to you?
    Last edited by redbelt; 03/27/2006 at 06:59 AM.
  12.    #112  
    In short, it would seem redbelt's research shows that the death penlaty is a funciton of treason not of conversion. That suggests that the nation and the religious order are one and the same. This sheds light on why many reject theocracies.

    As with any governmental construct, a theocracy can only be successful as long as the citizens agree upon the standard. In this case that standard would be that the citizens share the same theology.

    Hence, when the Afghan man in question changed his theology, he became an enemy of the state.
  13. #113  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    In short, it would seem redbelt's research shows that the death penlaty is a funciton of treason not of conversion. That suggests that the nation and the religious order are one and the same. This sheds light on why many reject theocracies.

    As with any governmental construct, a theocracy can only be successful as long as the citizens agree upon the standard. In this case that standard would be that the citizens share the same theology.

    Hence, when the Afghan man in question changed his theology, he became an enemy of the state.
    That's exactly right. Bernard Lewis explains in 'What Went Wrong: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East' that in Islamic theology there is no distinction between the religious and the political worlds. They don't have a codified concept of separation of church and state--or mosque and state as it were. Of course, many Muslims today do grasp that concept. But those who would turn the clock back to a more 'pure Islam' will not acknowledge it because it doesn't exist either in the Qur'an or in the Sunnah and Hadith.
  14. #114  
    So, what is a Christan missionary classified as that has praises for local and national leaders and operations of gov and recognizes Islam as a viable option religious option but only offers an alternative religious choice?

    In other words, no ill words or intent against Islam or gov. Only there for those who are interested to learn about possible alternatives.

    Are they an enemy of the state and may be tried and executed as such?
  15. #115  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Are they an enemy of the state and may be tried and executed as such?
    Under Sharia, I would imagine so. As I said in an earlier post, an Aid worker in Afghanistan was skinned alive because he was thought to be a missionary. Of course, to be fair, that act was committed by civilians and not the government.
  16. #116  
    No doubt the Govt of both countries will chaim a good resolution to this, with the guy released and fleeing the country for his life. But this does not fix the inherent problems with a modern society living under sharia or any theocratic rule (of any religion).

    Will all this get repeated when the next convert (or missionary) surfaces?
    --
    Aloke
    Cingular GSM
    Software:Treo650-1.17-CNG
    Firmware:01.51 Hardware:A
  17. #117  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    Under Sharia, I would imagine so. As I said in an earlier post, an Aid worker in Afghanistan was skinned alive because he was thought to be a missionary. Of course, to be fair, that act was committed by civilians and not the government.
    I had never heard of this. Do you have a link to more information?
  18. #118  
    USA Today changed the title of the article from
    Afghans protest decision on Christian to U.N.: Christian convert seeking asylum outside Afghanistan Whatever the title of the article is, here an update:


    Afghans protest decision on Christian
    3/27/2006 6:12 AM Updated 3/27/2006 1:32 PM

    KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — An Afghan man who faced the death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity has appealed for asylum in another country, the United Nations said Monday as hundreds of people protested in Afghanistan against a court's decision to drop a case.

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

    "Mr. Rahman has asked for asylum outside Afghanistan," he said. "We expect this will be provided by one of the countries interested in a peaceful solution to this case."

    Officials said the case was dropped Sunday partially because of concerns that Abdul Rahman is mentally unfit to face trial. The move also followed strong pressure from Western governments.

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

    Muslim clerics have threatened to incite Afghans to kill Rahman if he is freed, saying that he is clearly guilty of apostasy and deserves to die.

    Monday's protest ended peacefully about two hours after it started in the northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif, said police commander Nasruddin Hamdrad. The protesters chanted "Death to Bush!" and other anti-Western slogans, while the police stood guard.

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

    Prison warden Gen. Shahmir Amirpur said Rahman had been asking guards for a Bible but they had none to give him.

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

    Rahman's case set off an outcry in the United States and other nations that helped oust the hard-line Taliban regime in late 2001 and provide aid and military support for Afghan President Hamid Karzai. President Bush and others have insisted that Afghanistan protect personal beliefs.

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

    Rahman was being prosecuted for converting to Christianity 16 years ago while working as a medical aid worker for an international Christian group helping Afghan refugees in Pakistan. He was arrested last month after police discovered him with a Bible.

    FULL STORY: http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2...e_x.htm?csp=15
    Last edited by HobbesIsReal; 03/27/2006 at 10:45 PM.
  19. #119  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    I had never heard of this. Do you have a link to more information?
    I'm looking for the exact story. It was quite a while ago that I read it so I can't remember the specifics well enough to get a good google hit. In the meantime I found these documents that outline some of the practices of various Afghan groups

    http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/v...I&id=415c60f84

    http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/v...I&id=3df0b6334

    NOTE: NOT FOR THE FAINT HEARTED... SERIOUSLY!
  20. #120  
    I for one am not a supporter for seperation of Mosque and state. So long as the state does not BECOME the mosque.
    My religion offers basic rules for banking, conduct, and other laws. It also justifies such rules by explaining why. Therefore, I do beleive that it should be the base of laws in a muslim state. Other laws that were not addresses can be set up freely by the state. eg: Islam does tell us that an intrest bearing loan is forbidden because you cannot earn money by lending money. Islamic banks would for example buy a house and resell it to you with a profit and will take installments from you. Islam however said nothing about.. um.. traffic laws, so the traffic dept. is free to do what they see fit.
    I understand where most of you come from when talking about church and state, seeing as how the church WAS the state and we all know how this ended up.
    Thats why I do not support Binladen, Nor Iran, nor to a certain degree, KSA.

    What I am saying is, Islam does offer a way of life (a good life mind) to people. Politicians here should use it as the basis for laws, but I do not support clerics setting up laws or handeling state because they are clerics not politicians. That scenario only would lead to Middle ages Europe or Iran.

    Example: Malayasia is an exempleory muslim state. Anyone been there? It is very advances, Economy is booming, Muslims and other religions and multiple races live in harmony. That is exactly what should happen.

    Please... go on.
Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast

Posting Permissions