Athiest attacked by Muslims with machetes

[Parsimony]

Nothing wrong with executing apostate within islamic state, after a court decided that.

There is everything wrong with that: it is still killing people for a difference of opinion. Why should an opinion of any kind be worthy of death?

Any scholar who says the death sentence applies to leaving the faith, then the convict is to be given a life-time to repent, and this is the view of Sufyan al-Thawri, Ibrahim al-Nakha’ee, Shamsuddeen al-Sarakhshi, Imam al-Baji and, by strong implication, Ahmad Ibn Taimiya. One must conclude that the death sentence is not for “simple apostasy” (mujarrad al-ridda), but for apostasy accompanied by treason and sedition, or by the abuse and slander (sabb) of the Noble Prophet.

That doesn't excuse it. People should have the right to freely criticize anyone or any concept without fear of being killed for it. To say otherwise would be to imprison the mind behind the bars of censorship.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Nothing wrong with executing apostate within islamic state, after a court decided that.

I disagree. Such a court decision is unequivocally wrong and is categorized as a human rights abuse, regardless of the opinions of the religious scholars.

Any scholar who says the death sentence applies to leaving the faith, then the convict is to be given a life-time to repent, and this is the view of Sufyan al-Thawri, Ibrahim al-Nakha’ee, Shamsuddeen al-Sarakhshi, Imam al-Baji and, by strong implication, Ahmad Ibn Taimiya. One must conclude that the death sentence is not for “simple apostasy” (mujarrad al-ridda), but for apostasy accompanied by treason and sedition, or by the abuse and slander (sabb) of the Noble Prophet.

Is Killing An Apostate in the Islamic Law?

Is there a qualification for what makes commentary by an apostate slanderous? Or is it left to the opinions of the people in charge?

 

[Revoltingest]

Nothing wrong with executing apostate within islamic state, after a court decided that.

Within a given country with laws enforcing a state religion, I can see the perspective that there's "nothing wrong".
But would you allow that countries with laws making the practice of Islam a capital crime are similarly doing "nothing wrong"?
I'm pointing out that there is a very big problem with having a deadly legal system which.....
- Treats different religions in a fashion which one wouldn't want one's own treated.
- Will kill people for mere religious speech (not advocating violence, theft or other widely agreed upon evils).

 

[Servant_of_the_One1]

There is everything wrong with that: it is still killing people for a difference of opinion. Why should an opinion of any kind be worthy of death?
That doesn't excuse it. People should have the right to freely criticize anyone or any concept without fear of being killed for it. To say otherwise would be to imprison the mind behind the bars of censorship.

Yes they have that fully freedom in west.


And such freedom is giving to the apostate that does not insult religion/prophet pbuh within islamic country where shariah is applied. Ofcourse Shias and salafis(saudi arabia) will disagree with me! To them all types of apostasy is punishable by death.

 

[Treks]

What do RFs other Muslims have to say about the matter?

 

[LuisDantas]

Yes they have that fully freedom in west.


And such freedom is giving to the apostate that does not insult religion/prophet pbuh within islamic country where shariah is applied. Ofcourse Shias and salafis(saudi arabia) will disagree with me! To them all types of apostasy is punishable by death.

That is troubling. Very troubling indeed.

 

[Treks]

So perhaps they weren't Islamic extremists after all, but just being good Muslims adhering to the teachings of their faith.

 

[Vinayaka]

So perhaps they weren't Islamic extremists after all, but just being good Muslims adhering to the teachings of their faith.

If that is the case, it's time the world woke up.

 

[Poeticus]

To them all types of apostasy is punishable by death.

The blogger was not an apostate, he was a Hindu atheist.

That is troubling. Very troubling indeed.

And representative of our understanding of Islamic rigorism, even though arbitrary selectivists will have us believe otherwise. Let us recap the facts so far:

1. The blogger was a Hindu atheist.
2. The blogger was married to a Muslim female.
3. Kafir married to a Muslim female is a big no-no.
4. Muslim females and non-Muslim males in relationships often get killed for being in a union that most Muslim rigorists deem to be abominable (this is also misogynistic and patriarchal since marriage regulations in such socio-religious communities are developed to control both the breeding and dating practices of female populations).
5. Whether if it was an Islamic state's injunction that allowed the killing of the blogger or whether vigilante mobs did it, the end result would still have been death (as per Servant's own reasoning and citations).​

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

This is disgusting. I'm ashamed to live on a planet where millions are still stuck in the Dark Ages and then read the vile posts of someone basically defending the killing of people who "insult" their long dead crackpot pedophile "prophet". Nice to see the mentality of the Inquisition is alive and well.

 

[Vinayaka]

What will become of the perpetrators? Do they get martyred?

 

[LuisDantas]

I won't condemn the average Muslim over this.
Give'm a break before speculating that they'll dismiss this, eh.

When did "to wonder if" become synonimous with "to condemn"?

 

[Revoltingest]

When did "to wonder if" become synonimous with "to condemn"?

Please excuse me suggesting that.
Not my intention.

 

[Vinayaka]

On Global news (Canada) just now there was a story about a couple of universities in Canada cancelling some Arabic classes, and the teacher threatening to sue. Six of the kids from Canada that left to join ISIS took those classes. I say good on the universities. This nonsense has to stop.

 

[gsa]

My understanding was that they weren't an Islamic apostate, but Hindu atheists. Not that it matters, given the brutality, but there is a difference, which is that they weren't killed for quitting Islam, but for never being Islamic in the first place. The situation for Hindus in Bangladesh seems to worsen every day.

Bangladesh Islamic assailants hack to death noted writer and Hindu atheist Avijit Roy, wife injured | World Hindu News

From the names, it looks more to be a mixed faith marriage.

And atheists everywhere among the ummah.

 

[Smart_Guy]

Well of course, they were Muslims and Muslims are terrorists!

Get rid of Muslims, NOW!

 

[SomeRandom]

Yes they have that fully freedom in west.


And such freedom is giving to the apostate that does not insult religion/prophet pbuh within islamic country where shariah is applied. Ofcourse Shias and salafis(saudi arabia) will disagree with me! To them all types of apostasy is punishable by death.

I think the bigger insult to Islam are those human garbage wastes of space, who hacked a man to death and attacked a woman with machetes. The man spoke out against those scumbags,not religion, not the prophet, he spoke out against extremists making their respective religion look like a Middle Ages Inquisition. If moderate Muslims really wish to deny those atrocious barbaric and despicable thugs, I would have thought they would condemn their appalling actions, no matter the victim. Show a strong stance against such cowardice.
Not say (however roundabout) that they were just being vigilantes. But then, perhaps I'm wrong about Islam. Perhaps I'm just a little too optimistic. After all I'm no Muslim.