Time to reciprocate Islam’s attitude towards non-Muslims – counter apostasy laws in Islamic countries with laws against conversion to Islam in non-Muslim countries

Posted on October 11, 2008. Filed under: Islam, Islamic propaganda, Muslims, Politics, religion |

On October 03, 2008 Barnabas Fund reported that, ‘The Iranian Parliament has given provisional approval, by a majority of 196 to seven, to a bill that mandates the death penalty for apostasy from Islam. Until now Iranian judges could impose the death penalty in such cases only on the basis of Islamic law and fatwas, not on the basis of Iranian law”.

The bill prescribes a mandatory death sentence for any male Muslim who converts from Islam to another religion, and lifelong imprisonment for female converts from Islam. It also gives the Iranian secular courts authority to convict Iranians living outside the country of “crimes relating to Iranian national security”. This could be used against the many Iranian Christians who live outside Iran but are involved in evangelism within it. The bill, which was drafted earlier this year, is now being reviewed in parliament, giving MPs the opportunity to amend it. Before it becomes law the bill will also be vetted by the Council of Guardians, a twelve-member legislative body with the power to veto any bill that does not conform to Islamic law and the constitution.

Killing ex-Muslims who have converted out of Islam is never explicitly given out in the Quran. This is usually added to by the various Muslim interpreters and commentators of the Quran, based primarily on the authority or citation of certain Hadiths, where the Prophet of Islam is explicitly shown as executing or ordering the execution of an ex-Muslim who had “apostasized” – the Sunnah route for justification of all sorts of barabarities aimed essentially at keeping tight biological control over a captive population under the class of most retrogressive and biologically greedy, fanatical, male Islamic theologians.

We can debate a lot about the legal validity of death penalty for apostasy in the core texts of Islam. Some Muslims, concerned about maintaining the “humane” face of Islam for propaganda purpose until Islam gets militarily strong enough to obliterate all other cultures by Jihadic violence, would try to shout that it is the Quran which is the supreme authority and the Hadiths are dubious, and any contradiction between the Quran and the hadiths should always be settled in favour of the Quran. The problem is the Quran does not rule out death penalty for apostasy explicitly either. So technically, Islamic countries can bring in this law.

However debating about this in academic fora will never stop these increasing hardcore tendencies within Islamic countries. This tendency will increase as the Islamic theologians are realizing that their grip over their flock is growing increasingly tenuous – given the growing penetration of modern scientific knowledge and a much greater awareness of the violent and almost primitive, biologically greedy basic agenda of Islam, among the non-Muslims. I believe, that due course of history will remove these Muslim theologians in bloody revolutions of the Jacobin type – where the fanatical head of Robespierre that chopped off the heads of Danton or Marat, itself rolled off soon after. This process should be encouraged and helped so that Muslims forced to live under these Ulemas and Ayatollahs decide to get rid of them.

However, until that happens, there should be a concerted agreement among the non-Muslim national legislatures that behaviour towards Islam should be determined by the attitudes, laws and behaviours in the worst offender among the Islamic countries. Thus until a single Islamic country remains that awards death penalty for apostasy out of Islam, all non-Muslim countries should award the maximum penalty possible under their respective laws for conversion into Islam. Until a single Islamic country remains that forcibly separates couples and annuls marriages between Muslims and non-Muslims, no marriage should be allowed between Muslims and non-Muslims in non-Islamic countries.  As long as there is evidence of destruction of non-Muslim cultural sites in any Islamic country, no new Islamic cultural sites should be allowed to come up in non-Islamic countries. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights should be amended to incorporate reciprocality clauses. Only under such concerted non-Islamic efforts would the OIC and other fronts representing Islam at the governmental and international level feel sufficient pressure to stop the persecution of non-Muslims.

The non-Muslims should begin to learn from the Muslims what to do with those among the non-Muslims sufficiently “seduced” to submit to Islam – be it the attraction of “exotic charms” of “kohl marked eyes” and harem fantasies [a huge erotica industry in the West flourishes on extreme Harem fantasies], “oil wealth”, the religiously sanctioned and enjoined possessiveness of Islamic males misinterpreted by non-Muslim females as “love”,   or the simplification and certainty of “rules” of behaviour and faith for those in severe need of submitting to an authority and not finding it within Christianity [perhaps the danger of bringing up children in extreme rule based and authoritarian implementation of Christianity, and not encouraging independent questioning, or not giving proper unrestricted exposure to all scholarly research on the origins of the revealed traditions without suppression of uncomfortable aspects ].


Make a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...

%d bloggers like this: