NationStates Jolt Archive

Islam is perhaps unique among religions in that it sanctions the killing of those who leave it. Though only a few countries actually permit such actions, harassment of apostates is still a serious problem. The Times of London recently did a story on the issue, and it can be found here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1470584,00.html
A group in Canada which is very faithful to strict Islam has put together a strong defense of how to deal with apostates here:
http://muslim-canada.org/apostasy.htm
My question is mostly for the Muslims here. How do you personally deal with those you know who have left your religion (if you know any) and how do your leaders, tell you to deal with them? And as a further question, are these suggestions supported from the Koran? Can you show me the support?
As a side note, it may appear from other posts I have made that I have something against Islam. I don't. What I have a problem with is the violence which seems to be encouraged by the devout sections of your religion. Please take my question as a request for information and not a flame.

I have a first edition of The Satanic Verses which I would perhaps be willing to part with for a reasonable sum.

christianity killed apostates in the past, some minor sects still have been known to, i believe there have been cases of mormon splinter groups killing people who left in the past ten years.

My question is mostly for the Muslims here. How do you personally deal with those you know who have left your religion (if you know any) and how do your leaders, tell you to deal with them?

I just shrug and say, "Well ... good luck with that". It's their choice. As for my "leaders", I have no leader except Allah. I follow only Allah's will, not the will of any man.

And as a further question, are these suggestions supported from the Koran? Can you show me the support?

Killing apostates? Not sanctioned by Qur'an.

"Those who blasphemed and back away from the ways of Allah and die as blasphemers, Allah shall not forgive them." Surah Nisah 48.

If we kill a person for leaving Islam, we are robbing them of the chance to change their ways. We are taking something from them that Allah gave them and, thus, we would be guilty.

Religion in general is fucked up. Islam is fucked up more than most. At least the way it's practiced in Saudi and by those Islamofascists who seem to be gaining in popularity in many parts of the muslim world.

1. Islam does not sanction killing any more than Christianity or Judaism does.

2. Islam has alot of good things too.

The Hajj is considered one of the greatest achievements of civilization: (excerpt from Wikipedia) "Nevertheless, in spite of the physical hardships, pilgrims who complete the Hajj consider it one of the greatest spiritual experiences of their lives. The Hajj is seen in many cultures as one of the great achievements of civilization, because it brings together people from one-fifth of the population of the entire world and focuses them upon a single goal: completing the Hajj. This is an achievement unparalleled in human history, and philosophers have said that only war can compare to the Hajj in terms of scale."

Just because you hate everyone who isn't christian doesn't mean you should say lies.

OOC: Heres the Wiki article(Here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajj#Millions_of_pilgrims))

christianity killed apostates in the past, some minor sects still have been known to, i believe there have been cases of mormon splinter groups killing people who left in the past ten years.

The killing of those who follow though is not sanctioned by Christian doctrine, unlike Muslim doctrine.

The killing of those who follow though is not sanctioned by Christian doctrine, unlike Muslim doctrine.

Did you hear what Keruvalia(A muslim) said?

Who is right? A crazy person who hates all non-christians, or a Muslim who has tolerance for all religions?

1. Islam does not sanction killing any more than Christianity or Judaism does.

The Hajj is considered one of the greatest achievements of civilization: (excerpt from Wikipedia) "Nevertheless, in spite of the physical hardships, pilgrims who complete the Hajj consider it one of the greatest spiritual experiences of their lives. The Hajj is seen in many cultures as one of the great achievements of civilization, because it brings together people from one-fifth of the population of the entire world and focuses them upon a single goal: completing the Hajj. This is an achievement unparalleled in human history, and philosophers have said that only war can compare to the Hajj in terms of scale."

Just because you hate everyone who isn't christian doesn't mean you should say lies.

OOC: Heres the Wiki article(Here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajj#Millions_of_pilgrims))

What have pilgrimages got to with wether or not killing is sanctioned? Christianity has pilgrimages, so does Hinduism. What's your point?

The killing of those who follow though is not sanctioned by Christian doctrine, unlike Muslim doctrine.

Read my first post in this thread. Killing apostates is not sanctioned by Muslim doctrine. Until you have read Qur'an and understand it, you cannot speak with any authority on Muslim doctrine.

Just because you hate everyone who isn't christian doesn't mean you should say lies.Please read my post and realize I do not hate them. And then stay on topic if you will. Thanks Keruvalia for addressing the issue.
More to the point, here is one quote which concerns me:
In the Prophetic Tradition, apostasy is punishable by death, a view which is upheld and detailed in both the Sunnite and Shi'ite law books.(4) However, the offender is usually granted an opportunity to recant. Only adult, sane, male apostates who have acted freely are to be executed (traditionally by the sword). Women are either imprisoned until they recant (Hannafites and Shi'ites) or are executed (Malikites, Shafi'ites, and Hanbalites).

4. The Hanafi school of law is based upon a Prophetic Tradition (Hadith) reported by 'Atiyah ibn Qais al-Kilaby (vide Sarakhsy, Sharha al-Siar al-Kabir, vol IV, 108). The Hanafi scholars rely on this Tradition: "The Prophet has said: 'Whoever commits murder or fornication or theft [in our territory] and escapes and then returns with permission, shall be tried and punished for what he wanted to escape from. Yet if he has committed murder, or fornication or theft in the territory of the enemy and came with permission, he will not be tried for what he committed in enemy territory." However, as to the enforcement of the law, the Sunnite and the Shi'ite schools of law operate on two different principles: the Sunnites exercise their enforcing authority/powers within the legal/geographical boundaries of their own jurisdiction. But under the Shi'ite law, enforcement powers can be exercised even in foreign lands, that is to say, beyond the jurisdiction of their own country. In other words, the Sunnites do not believe in extraterritorial jurisdiction, but the Shi'ites do.

Edit: I missed an important part of the footnote. Sorry, but here it is:
As to the enforcement of punishment of an apostate and the pre-prosecution, pre-trial, and pre-conviction procedures, see the excerpt of paragraph 332 under the next heading of 'The Muslim Conduct of State' and Kitab al-Fiqh ala al-Madahib al-Arbaa'h
Paragraph 332 says: The sayings and doings of the Prophet, the decision and practice of the Caliph Abu Bakr, the consensus of the opinion of the Companions of the Prophet and all the later Muslim jurisconsults, and even certain indirect verses of the Qur'an, all prescribe capital punishment for an apostate. In the case of apostasy, no distinction is made between a Muslim born of Muslim parents and a convert; and similarly there is no difference between accepting Judaism or Christianity, atheism or idol-worship or any other non-Islamic faith. Nevertheless, Muslim jurists emphasize that before prosecuting and condemning an apostate, it is necessary officially to discuss the matter with him and to remove his doubts regarding the soundness and reasonableness of the Islamic point of view in the matter concerned. Time is given him for reflection sometimes even for months before finally proceeding with the prosecution. There is no difference between a free man and a slave, as Sarakhsiy is explicit.

What have pilgrimages got to with wether or not killing is sanctioned? Christianity has pilgrimages, so does Hinduism. What's your point?

1. I edited the message. Re-read it.

2. I never said that the Hajj doesn't portray that killing is sanctioned. It just shows that Islam(REAL Islam, not extremism) has a very high tolerance for all cultures, and that Islam has brought over a fifth of the world together. While Christianity is split in half and groups left and right are trying to kill off everyone, Islam is one coninuous group where everyone strives for one thing.(although some groups differ in how to get there, and extremists are trying to kill everyone)

Did you hear what Keruvalia(A muslim) said?

Who is right? A crazy person who hates all non-christians, or a Muslim who has tolerance for all religions?

Saudi Arabi has the Qu'ran as its constitution.

Saudi Arabi sanctions the killing of Christians for possesing a Bible

Ergo, in the Qu'ran the killing of Christians is sanctioned

Saudi Arabi has the Qu'ran as its constitution.

Saudi Arabi sanctions the killing of Christians for possesing a Bible

Ergo, in the Qu'ran the killing of Christians is sanctioned

Have you even READ the Qu'ran?

Because if you haven't, then you can't say anything.

Thanks Keruvalia for addressing the issue.
More to the point, here is one quote which concerns me:

Well, if someone asks a serious question, I try to give them a serious answer. Your question is most certainly a valid one. :)

Now ... the quote ...

The Hadith are how the Prophet(pbuh) lived and details things he had done. Hadith is not an authority, but a guide. Muslims are not, however, supposed to ask ourselves "What Would Muhammed Do?", but rather "What does Allah want us to do?"

That question can only be answered by Qur'an.

Saudi Arabi has the Qu'ran as its constitution.

No ... it does not. Saudi constitution: http://www.oefre.unibe.ch/law/icl/sa00000_.html

Saudi Arabi sanctions the killing of Christians for possesing a Bible

No ... it does not.

Saudi Arabi has the Qu'ran as its constitution.

Saudi Arabi sanctions the killing of Christians for possesing a Bible

Ergo, in the Qu'ran the killing of Christians is sanctioned
Actually I think theyre just imprisoned or kicked out of the country depending on the situation.

Keruvalia, thank you very much. This is a topic I wish to understand more. I sent a letter to the Saudi embassy in DC and they sent me a copy of the Koran, so that is helping.

Neo Cannen and Lightning star, if you guys want to fight, do it somewhere else and let those who have something sustantive to add to the discussion do so.

No ... it does not.

Yes it does, whats the Mutawwa'in for then?

[QUOTE=Keruvalia]No ... it does not. Saudi constitution: http://www.oefre.unibe.ch/law/icl/sa00000_.html



The first paragraph of the site you quoted says that god's book and the sunnah of his prophet are it's constitution. Don't they beleive that the Koran is god's book? If so then you're wrong on that count, no?

Saudi Arabi has the Qu'ran as its constitution.

Saudi Arabi sanctions the killing of Christians for possesing a Bible

Ergo, in the Qu'ran the killing of Christians is sanctioned

False logic.

Even in the US a law may be struck down if it is counter to the text of the constitution, but that does not mean that all laws are included in the Constitution.


Ergo, even if you assumed the fact the Saudis use the Qu'ran as it's constitution and assuming that the possession of a bible is a capital offense , this ouwld only indicate that this law does not contravene the Constitution (Qu'ran), which can just as likely be because the document in question does not specifically forbid this punishment.

And there IS a difference between "not forbidding" and "actively sanctioning"

The US Constitution does not specifically sanction flight, but that doesn't change the fact that the FAA has laws on the books regarding how you can fly.

I never said that the Hajj doesn't portray that killing is sanctioned. It just shows that Islam(REAL Islam, not extremism) has a very high tolerance for all cultures, and that Islam has brought over a fifth of the world together. While Christianity is split in half and groups left and right are trying to kill off everyone, Islam is one coninuous group where everyone strives for one thing.(although some groups differ in how to get there, and extremists are trying to kill everyone)
No it doesn't. It proves that a lot of people are willing to believe in something that appeals to base instincts. I still want to know what the conversion ratio of males to females is in first world countries. Somehow I strongly suspect it heavily favors males.

Keruvalia, thank you very much. This is a topic I wish to understand more. I sent a letter to the Saudi embassy in DC and they sent me a copy of the Koran, so that is helping.

Neo Cannen and Lightning star, if you guys want to fight, do it somewhere else and let those who have something sustantive to add to the discussion do so.

Ok, i'll try to stay on topic.

But anyhoo, back on topic..

I have met and lived with Muslims for a large part of my life. Never do they talk about killing Christians or Jews. They talk about Cricket games, financial problems, where to buy the best vegetables. In Pakistan and Bangladesh at least, they live peacefully side-by-side with Christians and Jews. Muslims go to their Jewish friends childs Bar Mitzvah, and Christians join in a feast with the Muslims on Ramadan. Little Muslim and Hindu boys play soccer in the park. I have never once heard a Muslim say "kill all non-believers!"

i think christians and jews are generally tolerated in muslim states as "people of the book" as long as they don't attempt to convert muslims or violate muslim law.

Keruvalia, thank you very much. This is a topic I wish to understand more. I sent a letter to the Saudi embassy in DC and they sent me a copy of the Koran, so that is helping.


Well, I am no authority, but Inshallah I can answer questions to the best of my ability. The fact that you're willing to try to understand is all that matters.

Some folks prefer to remain safe in their blind hatred and ignorance. Perhaps it's because they are afraid they might learn some semblance of truth or even :eek: might find themselves desiring to convert.

Not that conversion is necessary for understanding ... except in Christianity. (ooh ... cheap shot ... sorry)

No it doesn't. It proves that a lot of people are willing to believe in something that appeals to base instincts. I still want to know what the conversion ratio of males to females is in first world countries. Somehow I strongly suspect it heavily favors males.

I wonder how Islam is the fastest growing Religion in the world then. I mean, if only men convert, then there would be no Muslim babies. And then the religion wouldn't grow, right?

Yes it does, whats the Mutawwa'in for then?

The Mutawwa'in does not have the power to execute, only the power to detain (for no more than 24 hours).

The first paragraph of the site you quoted says that god's book and the sunnah of his prophet are it's constitution. Don't they beleive that the Koran is god's book? If so then you're wrong on that count, no?

Qur'an *and* the Hadith make up part of the Saudi Constitution, but are not the whole - otherwise, the document would end with Article I.

However, the blanket statement of "Saudi Arabia's Constitution is the Qur'an" is false.

Keruvalia, thank you very much. This is a topic I wish to understand more. I sent a letter to the Saudi embassy in DC and they sent me a copy of the Koran, so that is helping.

Neo Cannen and Lightning star, if you guys want to fight, do it somewhere else and let those who have something sustantive to add to the discussion do so.


I wouldnt mind a free copy of the Quran, i am seriously considering writing to the saudi embassy, honestly.

The Mutawwa'in does not have the power to execute, only the power to detain (for no more than 24 hours).

The Police in Britain do not have the power to sentence. They have the power to detain and charge. Please make sense. They detain, and if there is a bible found in posession, they charge. This comming from the place where all Muslims pray towards and attemt to go to at least once in a lifetime. If Islam is so tollerant, why is one of its theocracies supporting the persecution of Christians?

Qur'an *and* the Hadith make up part of the Saudi Constitution, but are not the whole - otherwise, the document would end with Article I.

However, the blanket statement of "Saudi Arabia's Constitution is the Qur'an" is false.
Ok

Qur'an *and* the Hadith make up part of the Saudi Constitution, but are not the whole - otherwise, the document would end with Article I.


So logicaly the laws that allows Saudi Arabi to kill Christians may be unconstitutional. In that case why is it there? Unless it isnt unconstiutional and it is there?

Saudi Arabi has the Qu'ran as its constitution.

Saudi Arabi sanctions the killing of Christians for possesing a Bible

Ergo, in the Qu'ran the killing of Christians is sanctioned
First Suadi Arabia does not have the Qu'ran as its constitution, that statement is just plan absurd.

Second where in Suadi law is the execution of a Christian prescribed for owning a bible. Again, pure pablum.

Third, and most importantly, I am a Christian, Ihave read the Koran/Qu'ran and also much of the recorded writting of Abu Bakr.
Islam does not sanction the killing of Christians, in truth it is more true that the Qu'ran proclaims these murderers of "People of the Book" as themselves apostates.

Abu Bakr himself was very clear how battle against infidels was to be carried out. The men who currently deface Islam break nearly every rule ever prescribed to the Muslim who finds himself at war.

The tripe of CNN watching History channel disciples is disgusting. Stop attempting to judge an entire culture and religion based on the actions of mad men.

I wouldnt mind a free copy of the Quran, i am seriously considering writing to the saudi embassy, honestly.

No need. You're in Phoenix, right?

Islamic Center
5743 N. 35th Ave.
Phoenix, AZ 85017
Phone: (602) 433-1377

Masjid Jauharatul-Islam
102 West South Mountain Avenue
Phoenix, AZ 85041
Phone: (602) 268-6151

So logicaly the laws that allows Saudi Arabi to kill Christians may be unconstitutional. In that case why is it there? Unless it isnt unconstiutional and it is there?

There is no law that allows Saudi Arabia to kill someone just for being Christian.

Please cite a source for it.

Otherwise, it's like saying Texas has a law that allows you to drag black people to death behind your truck. Since it clearly happened once.

The Police in Britain do not have the power to sentence. They have the power to detain and charge. Please make sense. They detain, and if there is a bible found in posession, they charge. This comming from the place where all Muslims pray towards and attemt to go to at least once in a lifetime. If Islam is so tollerant, why is one of its theocracies supporting the persecution of Christians?
It does not support the persecution of Christians, it is specifically to stop the Missionary Ideal of Christians.
Muslims do not travel to Suadi to preached to by Christian pilgrims, which is exactly what would happen were it not illegal for non-Muslim to minister in anyway.
This may be difficult to grasp, but in a theocracy they have the right to favor their chosen religion. Not allowing Christian to recruit and not allowing them the tools to do so is not persecution.

If Islam is so tollerant, why is one of its theocracies supporting the persecution of Christians?

I'm glad for it, myself. After all, when I go on Hajj, I do not want somebody waving a Bible in my face and screaming about Jesus - which is what those evangelist missionaries want to do there. It is those missionaries who want to come into Saudi Arabia and persecute us for being Muslim (rather than Christian) and the Saudi government has said, "Oh no you don't".

Christians are not persecuted. They are prevented from persecuting others. Get over it. Just because you're a Christian does not give you the right to go anywhere in the world and preach about Jesus without regard to the willingness of the listener.

We don't walk into your churches telling all of you how to live your lives and how to worship, don't do it to us. Or is that too much to ask?

Incidently, a Muslim man can be detained by the Mutawwa'in for making lewd gestures or comments to women in public. The Mutawwa'in is not just in place to take away your Bible.

Stop attempting to judge an entire culture and religion based on the actions of mad men.

for me, i look at the (in)actions of the rest of the religion and am pretty disgusted. i see nothing but apathy in the muslim religion--it is your duty to police your religion and stop fanaticism. i don't see any effort in the muslim community to bring about reforms. i remember parades in many countries following 9/11 with thousands of people celebrating the deaths of 3000+ innocents. if the US did not support israel, muslims would have driven the jews into the sea years ago. my view of islam is one of intolerance and barbarity--i do not view all adherents as such, but see a pretty sickening doctrine.

It does not support the persecution of Christians, it is specifically to stop the Missionary Ideal of Christians.
Muslims do not travel to Suadi to preached to by Christian pilgrims, which is exactly what would happen were it not illegal for non-Muslim to minister in anyway.
This may be difficult to grasp, but in a theocracy they have the right to favor their chosen religion. Not allowing Christian to recruit and not allowing them the tools to do so is not persecution.

1) I would call not allowing Christians to speek out actions against both freedom of speech and freedom of religion

2) I would also call not allowing Christians to own a Bible an act of persecution against Christians

3) Since all Saudi Arabian citizens must be Muslims, I would say that they are either extremely prejudiced or extremely extreme in anti immigration

As well, lest I forget to add this.
Muslims respect the Bible.
They recognize Jesus as a prophet.
While as A Christian I think they are off track--guess what they think I am of track!!!
They simply in the Holiest of their Holies do not want MIssionaries ministering to the piligrims.
That is not wrong.

Muslims have a tradition of tolerance for other religions--not equal treatment, but tolerance.
While one can find a great instances of Christian tolerance and even equality, the greatest acts have been oppression and murder.

Slandering another group of people or their is in and of itself not Christian.
SO I am curious as to where it is recorded that Christ insulted other peoples faiths.
I dont recall it.

Why dont you just call Keruvalia a G-dless heathen and be done. Since you have no genuine understanding of Islam, and do not desire one, you can not possibly comment on it with any intelligent insights.

1) I would call not allowing Christians to speek out actions against both freedom of speech and freedom of religion

2) I would also call not allowing Christians to own a Bible an act of persecution against Christians

3) Since all Saudi Arabian citizens must be Muslims, I would say that they are either extremely prejudiced or extremely extreme in anti immigration

1. What? Make sense, boy!

2. They ARE allowed to own a Bible!

3. Well, Saudi Arabia IS the Holy Land of Islam. So if Saudi Arabia is bad, it's just as bad as the Vatican(where you need to be a Catholic to be a Citizen).

I'm glad for it, myself. After all, when I go on Hajj, I do not want somebody waving a Bible in my face and screaming about Jesus - which is what those evangelist missionaries want to do there. It is those missionaries who want to come into Saudi Arabia and persecute us for being Muslim (rather than Christian) and the Saudi government has said, "Oh no you don't".

Christians are not persecuted. They are prevented from persecuting others. Get over it. Just because you're a Christian does not give you the right to go anywhere in the world and preach about Jesus without regard to the willingness of the listener.


There is a little thing called "Freedom of thought and religion" which is one of a number of things known colectively as "Human rights". Said things apply all over the world since all are HUMAN!

2. They ARE allowed to own a Bible!


http://www.domini.org/openbook/sau20020520.htm

No they are not.

1) I would call not allowing Christians to speek out actions against both freedom of speech and freedom of religion

2) I would also call not allowing Christians to own a Bible an act of persecution against Christians

3) Since all Saudi Arabian citizens must be Muslims, I would say that they are either extremely prejudiced or extremely extreme in anti immigration

You mean something like the Tsitsistas language being illegal to speak in America for almost hundred years.

You mean something like the Tsitsistas religion being illegal to practice for over a hundred years? IN America, you mean like that?

It is not Illegal in Suadi for Christians to OWN Bibles.

There is a diffrence between less then equal treatment and oppression.
Of course the Christians have never oppressed other Faiths, Genocide is their bread and butter.

There is a little thing called "Freedom of thought and religion" which is one of a number of things known colectively as "Human rights". Said things apply all over the world since all are HUMAN!

Hypocrite.

You talk about "freedom of religion" while constantly saying that Islam is evil.

Also, how would YOU feel if YOU were going on a Pilgrimage to, lets say, Bethlehem, and a Muslim Imam was jumping around you and constantly talking about how you should convert?

There is a little thing called "Freedom of thought and religion" which is one of a number of things known colectively as "Human rights". Said things apply all over the world since all are HUMAN!

So you think you have the right to come into my house and preach Christianity to my children? Go ahead ... try it. You'll find that right ends where my baseball bat connects to your skull.

You have the right to be Christian anywhere you go in the world. You do *not* have the right to preach your religion everywhere you go in the world.

Can you not see the difference? Are you really that dense?

I'm also still waiting for proof of a law on the Saudi books that says it's ok to kill someone for being Christian.

[QUOTE=Erinin]
It is not Illegal in Suadi for Christians to OWN Bibles.

QUOTE]
As long as they don't bring them into Saudi.

Hypocrite.

You talk about "freedom of religion" while constantly saying that Islam is evil.

Also, how would YOU feel if YOU were going on a Pilgrimage to, lets say, Bethlehem, and a Muslim Imam was jumping around you and constantly talking about how you should convert?
He may beleive Islam is evil, but he's not saying it should be banned. Freedom of religion doesn't imply freedom from having your religion criticized.

http://www.domini.org/openbook/sau20020520.htm

No they are not.
Cute story.

Christians are allowed to own Bibles, they are not allowed to minister.

Those Filipinos were Ministering to Coworkers which is against the law.

And please quote a non-Christian resource.

[QUOTE=Erinin]
It is not Illegal in Suadi for Christians to OWN Bibles.

QUOTE]
As long as they don't bring them into Saudi.

No silly monkey, as long as they dont minister.

He may beleive Islam is evil, but he's not saying it should be banned. Freedom of religion doesn't imply freedom from having your religion criticized.
Saudi Arabia is not America.
There is no Bill of rights.
There is no law that says everyone has freedom of religion.
We are not talking about American laws.
The World does not revolve around American ideas.
NO matter how much easier it would make it for the simpleminded to understand things.

Saudi Arabia is not America.
There is no Bill of rights.
There is no law that says everyone has freedom of religion.
We are not talking about American laws.
The World does not revolve around American ideas.
NO matter how much easier it would make it for the simpleminded to understand things.

Human rights are not just American laws. They are called HUMAN RIGHTS for a reason. What if America did this to Muslims. Would you be so tollerant then?

So you think you have the right to come into my house and preach Christianity to my children? Go ahead ... try it. You'll find that right ends where my baseball bat connects to your skull.

You have the right to be Christian anywhere you go in the world. You do *not* have the right to preach your religion everywhere you go in the world.

Can you not see the difference? Are you really that dense?

Theres another thing called "Freedom of Speech". Another one of those "HUMAN RIGHTS" which you so kindly chose to ignore.

The World does not revolve around American ideas.
understand things.
Not yet, but we're working on it.

Theres another thing called "Freedom of Speech". Another one of those "HUMAN RIGHTS" which you so kindly chose to ignore.

So ... you think you have the right to come into my house and preach Christianity to my children?

So ... you think you have the right to come into my house and preach Christianity to my children?
Maybe he just wants the right to go into a country and preach christianity. That's different from going into somebody's house.

So ... you think you have the right to come into my house and preach Christianity to my children?

No, I think I should have the right to go to Saudi Arabia and preech Christianity. The house thing comes down to the right for privicy. Though that idea cannot apply to an entire country.

Maybe he just wants the right to go into a country and preach christianity. That's different from going into somebody's house.

Not if the country in question is a monarchy.

No, I think I should have the right to go to Saudi Arabia and preech Islam.

Why?

The house thing comes down to the right for privicy. Though that idea cannot apply to an entire country.

Yes, actually, it can apply to a whole country.

Why?


Because of the great commision


Yes, actually, it can apply to a whole country.

No it can't. The right to privacy only works on a personal level. Anything above that is restriction of various other freedoms. Let me ask you this, how does Christian witnessing pose any kind of a threat to Saudia Arabia (Or owning a Bible for that matter).

Islam is perhaps unique among religions in that it sanctions the killing of those who leave it. Though only a few countries actually permit such actions, harassment of apostates is still a serious problem. The Times of London recently did a story on the issue, and it can be found here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1470584,00.html
A group in Canada which is very faithful to strict Islam has put together a strong defense of how to deal with apostates here:
http://muslim-canada.org/apostasy.htm
My question is mostly for the Muslims here. How do you personally deal with those you know who have left your religion (if you know any) and how do your leaders, tell you to deal with them? And as a further question, are these suggestions supported from the Koran? Can you show me the support?
As a side note, it may appear from other posts I have made that I have something against Islam. I don't. What I have a problem with is the violence which seems to be encouraged by the devout sections of your religion. Please take my question as a request for information and not a flame.

First of all I am not Christian or Muslim. I am Baha'i and thousands of my co-religionist have been killed by fanatical Muslims. Muhammed does not saction the killing of anyone for converting to any religion. Fanatics in any religion soil the garment of the Founder of that religion. Muhammed, Christ and today Baha'u'llah appeared to bring unity to the peoples of the world not dishonor to God's religion.

Because of the great commision

What about my human right to not have to listen to your drivel when I'm merely going to the grocery store? How about my human right to not be preached at by adherents of another religion when I am on a religious pilgrimage?

Sorry, pal, but your rights end where mine begins.

No it can't. The right to privacy only works on a personal level. Anything above that is restriction of various other freedoms.

In a monarchy, the whole country belongs to the monarch. It is, therefore, the monarch's house.

Let me ask you this, how does Christian witnessing pose any kind of a threat to Saudia Arabia (Or owning a Bible for that matter).

It doesn't. It does, however, pose a threat to the millions of pilgrims who go to Saudi Arabia and interferes with the sanctity of their religion. So, we then must decide who's religious freedoms take precident. The Christian's religious freedom to preach or the Muslim's religious freedom to not be preached at.

The two are mutually exclusive. You can't have them both.

Christian citizens of Saudi Arabia do own Bibles. You have yet to show me any links to Saudi law stating otherwise, but you keep going on about how Saudi law disallows Bible ownership and kills Christians. You're just making shit up, you know.

Linking to a story about some Jesus screaming Baptist having his Bible taken away is not proof of anything. I'd have taken his Bible away and kicked him out of my country as well.

So ... you think you have the right to come into my house and preach Christianity to my children?
No, but he can prosetlyze outside your house on the sidewalk during the daytime.

No, but he can prosetlyze outside your house on the sidewalk during the daytime.

Not really. Most cities require a permit for such things. You can't block the sidewalk any more than you can block a road without proper permits. You must also provide an alternate route for people who may need to use that sidewalk to get to work or school or go about their daily lives.

Also, if his preaching interferes with my household - for instance, he's screaming through a megaphone while my baby is trying to sleep - then he could be slapped with a cease and desist order and possibly a citation for noise ordinance violation.

Once again ... his rights end where mine begin.

First of all I am not Christian or Muslim. I am Baha'i and thousands of my co-religionist have been killed by fanatical Muslims. Muhammed does not saction the killing of anyone for converting to any religion. Fanatics in any religion soil the garment of the Founder of that religion. Muhammed, Christ and today Baha'u'llah appeared to bring unity to the peoples of the world not dishonor to God's religion.
Sounds good.

What about my human right to not have to listen to your drivel when I'm merely going to the grocery store? How about my human right to not be preached at by adherents of another religion when I am on a religious pilgrimage?

Sorry, pal, but your rights end where mine begins.



In a monarchy, the whole country belongs to the monarch. It is, therefore, the monarch's house.



It doesn't. It does, however, pose a threat to the millions of pilgrims who go to Saudi Arabia and interferes with the sanctity of their religion. So, we then must decide who's religious freedoms take precident. The Christian's religious freedom to preach or the Muslim's religious freedom to not be preached at.

The two are mutually exclusive. You can't have them both.

Christian citizens of Saudi Arabia do own Bibles. You have yet to show me any links to Saudi law stating otherwise, but you keep going on about how Saudi law disallows Bible ownership and kills Christians. You're just making shit up, you know.

Linking to a story about some Jesus screaming Baptist having his Bible taken away is not proof of anything. I'd have taken his Bible away and kicked him out of my country as well.
The freedom not to be preached at doesn't kick in until you tell the guy to shut up. Before that point it's free speech. After that point it's harrassment.

The freedom not to be preached at doesn't kick in until you tell the guy to shut up. Before that point it's free speech. After that point it's harrassment.
I agree with this statement. I think the lack of religious freedom in most Muslim countries is disgraceful. Saudi is not alone in this, as Iran has some pretty intense persecution of its Jews, Pakistan its Hindus, Indonesia its Christians...the list goes on. And sure, as Keruvalia keeeps saying "his rights end where mine begin" but yours also don't begin until his end, and free speech is a right. You don't have to listen to it, but he still has it, and you do not have a right not to be talked to. Not to be harassed, sure, and that is where you ask the guy kindly to go away. But like DC said, until that point, it is free speech.

Staying on topic myself. Keruvalia, you said that hadith are just a guide and this is something that must be settled by the Koran. So how, as the second part of my question, do you respond to those who are also Muslim, who see the guide of the hadith telling them, in this instance, that apostates are to be killed? How can you convince them they are still being devout if they disregard those hadith?