Dear Muhammad Riza,

How long you people will keep lying about islam? If Islam gave equal rights for women then why in 100% Muslim nations women are second class citizen? You are hiding truth about islam but whom you are fooling? You better write these craps in some Arab news paper and let Muslims read your new islamic fatwas. West had enough of Islam. Here is URL address for women's right in islam.

1. Women in Islam: By Abul Kasem
http://www.islam-watch.org/AbulKasem/WomenInIslam/women_in_islam.htm

Punishment for apostates:

YUSUFALI: They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks;-

Pakistani news July 20, 2007

MMA bill sent to standing committee
* Accused to lose right to property

ISLAMABAD: The National Assembly on Tuesday sent a bill called Apostasy Act 2006 to the standing committee concerned for consideration.

The MMA tabled the bill during Private Members’ Day in the assembly. The bill proposed sentencing to death male apostates and imprisonment till penitence or death for female apostates. The government did not oppose the bill and sent it to the standing committee concerned. If passed, the bill will over-ride all other laws in force at present. The bills’s section 4 states that apostasy can be proved if the accused confesses to the ‘offence’ in court or at least two adult witnesses appear in court against the accused.

Section 5 states that the court should give a proven apostate at least three days or a month at the maximum to return to Islam. If he refuses, he should be awarded the death sentence.

Section 6 states that a pardoned apostate can face rigorous or simple imprisonment, extendable to two years, if he commits the offence for the second or third time. In case of the fourth commission he will be liable to death sentence, it adds. Section 8 proposes suspending all rights of the accused over property. If the accused is awarded death, the part of the property, which he owned before committing the offence, will be transferred to his Muslim heirs. It states that the property rights of a female apostate will remain suspended till her death or penitence. In case of her penitence, the rights will be restored and after death, her property will be treated the same way as adopted for male apostates.

Section 9 states that the apostates’ right to guardianship over minors will remain suspended till their death. staff report

Daily Times

Mr. RaZI WHAT IS YOUR ANSWER TO THIS???

sYED k. mIRZA

"I think the definition of freedom is different in Islamic and Western world."

Pink bunny tree grass [that makes sense, I'm just defining each of the words differently.]

"Islamic tenents looks coersive to those who are not Muslims or Muslim who are unwilling to submit their will to God's will."

Or to put it another way, Islamic tenets are coersive.

"But good news is, in Islam there is no "compulsion", if you wish, you don't need to submit your will but dare not challenge."

Is there a better definition of fascism that someone can point me to?

This was very deep and insightful.

Thank You for your answer and service.

James Mayhall:
You have made very good point. Is woman really free in Islam? I think the definition of freedom is different in Islamic and Western world. And unfortunately I believe both may not meet anywhere unless of course we just tolerate each other.

Islam enforces responsiblity whereas western culture lets people chose.

Islam put emphasis on society well being and individual spritual well being where as west emphasis on individual rights to freedom.

Western ideas are apealing but can be destructive.

Islamic tenents looks coersive to those who are not Muslims or Muslim who are unwilling to submit their will to God's will.

But good news is, in Islam there is no "compulsion", if you wish, you don't need to submit your will but dare not challenge. Just live in peace or leave in peace.

This is what I understood reading all articles till now. It is realling helping my own Islamic roots and western perspective.

Some verses from the Koran on terror(ism) and unbelievers:

[3.151] We will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve, because they set up with Allah that for which He has sent down no authority, and their abode is the fire, and evil is the abode of the unjust.

[5.51] O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.

[8.59] And let not those who disbelieve think that they shall come in first; surely they will not escape. [8.60] And prepare against them what force you can and horses tied at the frontier, to frighten thereby the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them, whom you do not know (but) Allah knows them; and whatever thing you will spend in Allah's way, it will be paid back to you fully and you shall not be dealt with unjustly.

[9.5] So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

[47.4] So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates. That (shall be so); and if Allah had pleased He would certainly have exacted what is due from them, but that He may try some of you by means of others; and (as for) those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will by no means allow their deeds to perish.

Would you please explain how it is that women who must be shrouded in public and accompanied by a husband or male relative have freedom? Obviously, they do not have the freedom to dress as they please, to go where they wish when they wish, or to seek and form the friendships that they please.

As in the case of 99% of Muslim explanation of Islamic doctrine, your explanation denies the evidence of our eyes, denies our common sense, and contains nothing that a Westerner can grasp as a basis for conversation. Are you trying to tell us that we are worlds apart and that the twain shall never meet? Apparently, you are. So, why do you pretend to engage in discourse when your position is carved in stone?

"Being an apostate doesn't mean he/she converts to just Christianity or any other religion, for the record."

Here is what Sayyed Al-Ghurayfi wrote:

"These rules encompass the act of actually letting go of one of the necessary pillars of that religion or principle -- knowingly, purposefully and intentionally-- while moving to believe in another issue, which may be completely different from, or interrupt or even contradict previous belief."

My understanding of this [and based on other discussions] is that if a person converts and is seen in public practicing the tenets of the new faith, that would establish apostasy.

And in many countries within the Muslim world, the penalty for taking this action would be death.

Again, the primary point is the anti-secular movement within the Muslim world attempts to merge religious and political leadership as a theocratic state -- and the basis for such a state is well-defined within the Koran. As a result, political compromise is more difficult because policy issues are inherently political issues.

"Which needs to be discussed in 2007 is how US and allied nations can create wars across the globe and undermine international security."

The concept of a 'just war' and global security are certainly reasonable topics for discussion -- but those aren't the topics for this particular discussion.

"So, a Muslim who decides to convert to Christianity is a traitor and should be killed?"

Being an apostate doesn't mean he/she converts to just Christianity or any other religion, for the record. It means to undermind that particular society. Secondly, as the sheik stated, there is a process to determine if that individual is an apostate and threat to that particular society.

Which needs to be discussed in 2007 is how US and allied nations can create wars across the globe and undermine international security.

"It is to turn away from Islam and to be actively opposed to Islam, i.e. treason. Treason is taken extremely serious in any nation, am I wrong?"

So, a Muslim who decides to convert to Christianity is a traitor and should be killed?

Sigh.

This should be such a fundamental, obvious issue of human rights that it is sad that it even needs to be discussed in 2007.

People should be free to choose their faith without fear of death.

(Apostasy) "Its meaning is then no different from its meaning for any society or system where a member leaves and becomes a threat."

Very well put. To the average person apostasy is the act of turning away from one's previous beliefs. However, Islamically it is different. It is to turn away from Islam and to be actively opposed to Islam, i.e. treason. Treason is taken extremely serious in any nation, am I wrong?

"I received three questions form you and I don't know if they are part of the open dialogue/discussion, or if they have a goal in themselves."

A very intelligent inquisition. This forum is not a dialogue or discussion of any sort. It is a smear campaign with undertones of dialogue. Of course there is a goal involved, and that is to take real Muslims and give them the chance to express Islam, only to have it shot down by irrational, inappropriate viewers/commentators. They only want to say to other media outlooks "see, we tolerate Islam." When actually they are just opening the arena to more hostilities. They expect good dialogue and answers based on three questions that people right volumnes of books on is ridiculous. In the end it doesn't matter how many moderate/real Muslims come and give examples of violence, women, etc, they will only get shadowed by the extremists that take advantage of people.

(Apostasy) "Its meaning is then no different from its meaning for any society or system where a member leaves and becomes a threat."

Very well put. To the average person apostasy is the act of turning away from one's previous beliefs. However, Islamically it is different. It is to turn away from Islam and to be actively opposed to Islam, i.e. treason. Treason is taken extremely serious in any nation, am I wrong?

"I received three questions form you and I don't know if they are part of the open dialogue/discussion, or if they have a goal in themselves."

A very intelligent inquisition. This forum is not a dialogue or discussion of any sort. It is a smear campaign with undertones of dialogue. Of course there is a goal involved, and that is to take real Muslims and give them the chance to express Islam, only to have it shot down by irrational, inappropriate viewers/commentators. They only want to say to other media outlooks "see, we tolerate Islam." When actually they are just opening the arena to more hostilities. They expect good dialogue and answers based on three questions that people right volumnes of books on is ridiculous. In the end it doesn't matter how many moderate/real Muslims come and give examples of violence, women, etc, they will only get shadowed by the extremists that take advantage of people.

Again we have a bred, born and brainwashed Muslim not addressing the real issue of Islamic violence i.e. the militaristic and anti-feminine passages of the koran. One could recommend that these passages be deleted. Also to be deleted would be the Gabriel-Mohammed "communications" since Gabe was a fictional character as all "pretty flying wingie talking thingies" are. The passages plagiarized from the ancient religions to include Judaism and Christianity would also be deleted.

And what is left, nothing!!!!!!

Not a whole lot left to the OT, NT and the Book of Mormon either if you follow the same reasoning i.e.
1. Abraham founder/father of three major religions was probably a mythical character. If he was real, he was at best a combination of at least three men. 1.5 million Conservative Jews and their rabbis have relegated Abraham to the myth pile along with most if not all the OT.
From http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/ConservativeTorah.htm

2. Jesus, the illiterate Jewish peasant/carpenter possibly suffering from hallucinations, has been characterized anywhere from the Messiah from Nazareth to a mythical character from mythical Nazareth. Analyses of his life by many contemporary NT scholars (e.g. Professors Crossan, Borg and Fredriksen, On Faith panelists)via the NT and related documents have concluded that only about 30% of Jesus' sayings and ways noted in the NT were authentic. The rest being embellishments (e.g. miracles)/hallucinations made/had by the NT authors to impress various Christian sects.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

3. Luther, Calvin, Smith, Henry VIII, Wesley et al, founders of Christian-based religions, also suffered from the belief in/hallucinations of "pretty wingy thingie" visits and "prophecies" for profits analogous to the myths of Catholicism (resurrections, apparitions, ascensions and immaculate conceptions).