The War on Terror allows people the freedom to persecute
Apparently allowing Muslims the right to self-determination is having unexpected consequences. After the liberation of Afghanistan they have adopted Shari'a law, which claims that converting to Christianity is punishable by death, as an infidel who has caused harm to Islam.
From the Times of London Online:
PRESIDENT BUSH led international condemnation of Afghanistan yesterday over the case of a Muslim who converted to Christianity and now faces the death penalty under the country's Islamic laws.
He criticised the Afghan authorities, saying that liberated countries needed to respect democratic rights. "I am deeply troubled when I hear that a person who may have converted away from Islam may be held accountable," Mr Bush said.
His comments came after the arrest of Abdul Rahman this month. Under the 2004 Afghan Constitution, Mr Rahman could face the death penalty for an attack on Islam.
But yesterday it appeared that the case could be dismissed on a technicality if Mr Rahman were found mentally unfit to stand trial.
In Kabul the authorities appeared surprised by the outcry but insisted that the judicial process had to be respected.
But a human rights expert in the city said that the defendant's mental state could provide the authorities with an excuse to drop the case, but warned that "something like this will come up again".
"They don't want to upset their big donors, but this case highlights the gulf between Sharia law and statutory law." (Bold added for emphasis.)
So this guy is going to claim that his conversion to Christianity is a small part of his devastating mental illness. This is how he hopes to escape the death penalty, which would probably be by stoning.
Whatever happened to "Blessed are they who are persecuted for righteousness' sake"?
That's apparently the choice being offered to the repatriated Afghan, Abdul Rhaman, who moved back to Afghanistan from Germany after, you know, we made it a "free country" and all.
He's facing conviction and execution for the crime of converting to Christianity. It's the law, you know, and as moronic commenters to other posts on this blog have been pointing out, to obey and enforce the law is always of paramount concern. As an Afghan Christian, he's "ILLEGAL."
He does have a chance at being spared, though, by being declared insane. So, either he has to die, or suffer the indignity of being a mental case.
Afghanistan's constitution is based on Shariah law, which is interpreted by many Muslims to require that any Muslim who rejects Islam be sentenced to death. The state-sponsored Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission has called for Rahman to be punished, arguing he clearly violated Islamic law.
The case has received widespread attention in Afghanistan where many people are demanding Rahman be severely punished.
"For 30 years, we have fought religious wars in this country and there is no way we are going to allow an Afghan to insult us by becoming Christian," said Mohammed Jan, 38, who lives opposite Rahman's father, Abdul Manan, in Kabul. "This has brought so much shame."
I hasten to add that the imperative is to protect ourselves, America, and indeed, rational and freedom-loving people worldwide from clearly conveyed threats. I mean, that's an imperative, to outweigh all other considerations, no matter how grave. It will be fine with me to let those dirt-scratching primitives deal with one-another as the misogynist, mystical, pre-conceptual organisms they are. I don't know if they are prepared to keep to their primitive ways, and I don't know if the seeds for any sort of eventual Enlightenment have yet been sown.
To execute a man because of his religious beliefs, via the organized power of the state, with the citizenry cheering you on...? And they're breeding and reproducing misogynist, mystical, pre-conscious offspring by the millions...?
Well, those who speak the language and desire Enlightenment for the Muslim world had better get on the ball, because with this wide of a gulf between primitivity and modernity, with some of these regimes getting awfully close to nuclear and/or biological weapons technology, this just might not end well for them; and, as I said: there is the imperative.
I'll leave it at that, the implications being clear.