Death for Apostacy in Islam discussion

[KWED]

You can always repent and return to the religion.

Not if you've been executed.

 

[KWED]

So basically, lets say someone is an outspoken Atheist, will that be sorta like a death sentence? If one does it in public?

There are two routes here, which could be combined.
Muhammad said "Whoever leaves the religion of Islam, kill them".
The Quran says that anyone guilty of "spreading mischief" (fasad), or "waging war on Allah" should be killed. Ibn Kathir explains that "wage war" includes "opposition, contradiction and disbelief" while "mischief" includes "disbelief and acts of disobedience".

So yes, if a Muslim leaves Islam and then challenges and criticises the religion (like many do online, at speakers corner, etc), they are definitely for the chop!

 

[Link]

There are two routes here, which could be combined.
Muhammad said "Whoever leaves the religion of Islam, kill them".
The Quran says that anyone guilty of "spreading mischief" (fasad), or "waging war on Allah" should be killed. Ibn Kathir explains that "wage war" includes "opposition, contradiction and disbelief" while "mischief" includes "disbelief and acts of disobedience".

So yes, if a Muslim leaves Islam and then challenges and criticises the religion (like many do online, at speakers corner, etc), they are definitely for the chop!

Fasad (corruption/havoc) in the soul is not what is meant by that verse. It's more on what is with respect to the land and respect with people's lives, so that means things like rape, kidnapping kids for sexual work, forced prostitution (sexual trafficking), things like that that go against the safety and wellbeing of the affairs of people.

If it's corruption in the soul, you can kill a person for any sin, which is absurd.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

In an ordinary laymen's eyes, you can see it that way. But this is from Allah and we don't question Allah when he has ordained something in Islam.

Would you guess that an atheist would ever design to kill you if you became an atheist and then returned to Islam? Effectively "converting" to atheist and then "leaving" your atheism to return to theism.

No atheist I have ever heard of would even hint at such a thing. It would be barbaric, a blatant disregard for the rights of a person over their own thoughts, and to most people it would demonstrate that the ideology willing to do such things is dangerous, monstrous, and disgusting. Again... just think of it as if atheists (or any other religion that isn't your own) were doing the same things. You wouldn't agree with it then... so you must understand why so many would not agree with you now, and would very possibly gauge you to be part and party to a very terrible worldview.

 

[Debater Slayer]

That is your opinion and you are entitled to it.

This still glosses over how problematic the belief is, though. I don't think the right to life of an entire group of people is merely up to a matter of opinion. We're talking about a belief (i.e., executing someone for deconversion) that, unless you can demonstrate otherwise, is morally and logically the same as murdering someone for changing political parties or no longer voting for a specific candidate.

 

[sayak83]

Would you guess that an atheist would ever design to kill you if you became an atheist and then returned to Islam? Effectively "converting" to atheist and then "leaving" your atheism to return to theism.

No atheist I have ever heard of would even hint at such a thing. It would be barbaric, a blatant disregard for the rights of a person over their own thoughts, and to most people it would demonstrate that the ideology willing to do such things is dangerous, monstrous, and disgusting. Again... just think of it as if atheists (or any other religion that isn't your own) were doing the same things. You wouldn't agree with it then... so you must understand why so many would not agree with you now, and would very possibly gauge you to be part and party to a very terrible worldview.

Chinese communists... ahem...

 

[MyM]

This still glosses over how problematic the belief is, though. I don't think the right to life of an entire group of people is merely up to a matter of opinion. We're talking about a belief (i.e., executing someone for deconversion) that, unless you can demonstrate otherwise, is morally and logically the same as murdering someone for changing political parties or no longer voting for a specific candidate.

It isn't based on opinion. In Islam, the laws were made by Allah over 1400 years ago. He put them there for a reason. I have no right to say otherwise.

I am not political nor do I say something just out of the blue. A person asked, I answered

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Chinese communists... ahem...

Although that in itself is just another example of state-imposed belief (or nonbelief as the case may be) used to meet terrible ends. Would you guess that the average "atheist" citizen of China was in agreement that any such executions were "as it had to be?" Was it literally according to the principles of the citizens of the nation that theists of many stripes be persecuted in such a manner? Or was it state mandated, and state imposed in order to attempt to keep/gain power? Ultimately one would have to wonder if principles or judgments on moral rectitude were even a part of it. Or whether those in power were just keen to suppress variable thinking.

Not only that, but would those advocating that it is proper that an apostate be executed under certain circumstances spelled out within their brand of theism be so supportive of an atheist regime doing the same to believers? (Basically, the VERY QUESTION I ASKED ORIGINALLY). What's good for the goose...

Of course, one could, instead, make the parallel comparison that the citizens of China were stuck accepting the situation as "right" by virtue of the fact that it was what was deemed "right" by their tyrannical authority - exactly as a Muslim might find himself tacitly accepting an apostate's execution by virtue of the fact that their tyrannical authority deems such things "right" in the same sort of way. As much has basically been stated in this thread by an Islamic adherent already - though they wouldn't use the word "tyrannical", their tacit acceptance was clear, and even an explicit support of their authority's edicts on the matter.

And last but not least... let's remember who must necessarily carry out these executions. Is it the authority, who was so keen on the idea Himself, regardless what His supposed "beloved ones" thought about the idea? Nope. That guy is nowhere to be found. He's certainly not going to do His own dirty work any time soon. And so who does He get to go about the business of killing these people? His admiring fans turned hitman goons, that's who. And when there is killing involved, should we not question whether or not those goons are even sure about where the orders are coming from? Should we just accept that they know what they are talking about, and they must have very good reasons for doing these things to other people? Nah... that would be super duper dumb. Better to get the facts straight... and keep trying to get them straight until it makes sense to all of us one way or the other.

 

[Debater Slayer]

It isn't based on opinion. In Islam, the laws were made by Allah over 1400 years ago. He put them there for a reason. I have no right to say otherwise.

I am not political nor do I say something just out of the blue. A person asked, I answered

Many Muslims would strongly disagree with you, so opinion is clearly a part of the equation. It isn't as cut-and-dried and uniform as some Muslims and non-Muslims alike would try to argue.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The Prophet pbuh said: “It is not permissible to shed the blood of a Muslim who bears witness that there is no god except Allah and that I am His Messenger, except in one of three cases: a soul for a soul (i.e., in the case of murder); a married man who commits adultery; and one who leaves his religion and splits form the jamaa’ah (main group of Muslims).” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 6878; Muslim, 1676)

If a Muslim apostatizes and meets the conditions of apostasy – example, he is of sound mind, an adult and does that of his own free will – then his blood may be shed with impunity. He is to be executed by the Muslim ruler or by his deputy – such as the qaadi or judge, and he is not to not be washed (after death, in preparation for burial), the funeral prayer is not to be offered for him and he is not to be buried with the Muslims.


Your answer is that Allah swt is the One Who revealed this religion and enjoined it. He is the One Who ruled that the one who enters it and then leaves it is to be executed. This ruling does not come from the Muslims’ ideas or suggestions. As this is the case, then we must follow the ruling of Allah so long as we are content to accept Him as our Lord and God.

I guess that's that then for the "no compulsion in islam".
The blind following without questioning or any sort of underlying reasoning for this execution thing also exposes the moral bankruptcy of such behavior.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Allah says that his mercy supersedes his wrath.

"And if you don't believe me, you should be killed"

Uhu.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

In Islam, you were put on this earth to worship the only one worthy of worship and that is Allah, the Creator of you and me. How you deal with your own choices is up to you. You have your own free will to do as you wish. Islam is a guidance, a complete guidance. But the choice is yours to "have your freedom of religion or beliefs". Just don't try and blame Allah on the day of judgement.

Clearly if the punishment is death by execution, then there is no such freedom.


It's like I come into your house and put a gun to your head while demanding your wallet.
And then saying "Hey, you are a free person with free will. You have the freedom to choose not to give me your wallet. I'll kill you then off course, but you are free to make that choice".

Do you see how non-sensical that is?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

It's not on me to judge. You can do anything you want. Allah will judge you not me

Please. This is just a pathetic ploy to avoid your responsibility in the statements you make.

You worship this Allah whom you believe ordains these horrible things. You have made it perfectly clear already that you agree with and support the things he ordains.

That puts you in a position of having to defend such practices when challenged on terms of morality and alike.



To give an analogous example that we hopefully can both agree on, to illustrate this point....
Consider a nazi soldier on trial who has fully taken in the nazi ideals from Hitler and Goebbels. Those 2 commanded the soldiers to hunt down and kill jews just for the reason of being jews.
The nazi soldier fully backs his nazi hero's and doesn't question these commandments and instead agrees blindly with them.

Now the soldier is on trial for his deeds. And his defense consists of "hey, don't look at me, it's all Hitler and Goebels..."

Do you feel like this guy should get to avoid his moral responsibility like that?

I certainly don't.
So why should the moral responsibility for supporting executing apostates be any different?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I said anyone can believe anything that want. I said men have free will to choose or refuse.

You also said that they should be killed when they make a choice you (or your quran) doesn't agree with.

That kind of undermines the "free" part in "free choice".

 

[KWED]

The Prophet pbuh said: “It is not permissible to shed the blood of a Muslim who bears witness that there is no god except Allah and that I am His Messenger, except in one of three cases: a soul for a soul (i.e., in the case of murder); a married man who commits adultery; and one who leaves his religion and splits form the jamaa’ah (main group of Muslims).” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 6878; Muslim, 1676)

If a Muslim apostatizes and meets the conditions of apostasy – example, he is of sound mind, an adult and does that of his own free will – then his blood may be shed with impunity. He is to be executed by the Muslim ruler or by his deputy – such as the qaadi or judge, and he is not to not be washed (after death, in preparation for burial), the funeral prayer is not to be offered for him and he is not to be buried with the Muslims.


Your answer is that Allah swt is the One Who revealed this religion and enjoined it. He is the One Who ruled that the one who enters it and then leaves it is to be executed. This ruling does not come from the Muslims’ ideas or suggestions. As this is the case, then we must follow the ruling of Allah so long as we are content to accept Him as our Lord and God.

Your god seems pretty insecure and vindictive (a bit like a mob boss who whacks gang members who try to go straight).
I thought he was supposed to be the most merciful and most just.

 

[KWED]

Allah says that his mercy supersedes his wrath.

Ah, so he doesn't want apostates killed then? Phew, that's a relief!
But you just said he wanted apostates dead.
Your god seems confused.

 

[KWED]

Thanks for clarifying that, DS. I actually was wondering if that was a majority consensus. That may sound dum to you, but honestly its difficult for me to know. There are so many types and groups of people that its a lot to keep track of when I am mainly interested in my own problems. A misunderstanding can easily lead to deadly force. If one group perceives another is a danger then what follows can be very bad.

Sadly, in some countries there is a majority who support death for apostasy.

 

[KWED]

Current opinion on this is here.
Muslim Beliefs About Sharia

Gah! Beat me to it.

 

[KWED]

He would be potentially harming many people.

If Islam's hold over people is so weak that someone simply expressing an opinion about it is enough to cause a crisis of faith, then perhaps the problem is with Islam rather than the apostate.

It's a religious ruling that is applied due to faith. No amount of analyzing will take the proof for it away from religious sources.

So the "Nuremberg Defence".
The Final Solution was a command from the supreme ruler. No amount of analyzing would take the proof for it away from ideological sources.
"But we were only obeying orders"

 

[Brickjectivity]

Sadly, in some countries there is a majority who support death for apostasy.

The charts show support for something called 'Sharia' but don't mention the death penalty. I have been told that there are different interpretations of Sharia, so maybe these charts don't reflect support for death penalties. On the other hand they probably do.