Regular readers will recall the chairman of the Luton Islamic Centre stating in an ideal Islamic State homosexuals will be killed. I also wrote about Abdul Qadeer Baksh other views.
The Centre has got my attention again with its advice that apostates, those that leave the Islamic faith, must be killed. In a three page answer written by Jalal Abualrub on the question it argues that “no compulsion in religion” only applies to those that have never been muslim – not to apostates:
These are two completely different topics: forcing non-Muslims to embrace Islam vs. the punishment, carried out by the Islamic State, of those who were Muslim but committed the crime of abandoning Islam.
The punishment for the crime? They quote a Hadith:
“The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Messenger, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas (Law of Equity) for murder; a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse; and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims.”
The writer continues:
Should we also abandon the punishment for the adulterer, since ‘there is no compulsion in religion’? Should we also abandon other parts of the Islamic Penal code if the offense does not really harm others, such as abandoning Prayer, drinking, cursing the Prophet, salla-llahu `alaihi wa-sallam, etc., since ‘there is no compulsion in religion’? Who has any right to contradict the Prophet of Allah, salla-llahu `alaihi wa-sallam, who says, “He who reverts from his religion, then kill him”; [as- Silsilah as-Sahihah 487]? And those who contradict him, had they been alive during his time, salla-llahu `alaihi wa-sallam, would they have corrected the Prophet, who received the Quran, by reminding him that in Islam, which he brought from Allah, ‘there is no compulsion in religion’? Muslims should be strong and stand behind every part of their Law, if they seek Allah’s Help and Support that is.
Having established that the punishment for the “crime” of apostasy is death, the writer continues rather chilling to say no muslim can stand by and let them go unpunished:
if we leave the apostate un-punished he might go back to Islam, then what is stopping him from doing so before being killed, even if to become a hypocrite? What if he does not repent in the future and tempts others who have weak hearts and faith to follow him, should we stand idle while whole segments of the Muslim Society becomes non-Muslim?
Fundamentalism and literalism – someone said this and I must do it because it is my religion, no matter how blood thirsty, inhumane and cruel such an action would be. The incitement to kill those that leave a faith is in clear breach of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Let alone English Law.
Theresa May, the British Home Secretary, wants to get tough on extremism.
Here is your chance to act. Or do you want to see the body count of ex muslims stacking up on the streets of Britain before doing something that might tell the extremists their threats will not be allowed to stand?
My thanks to the Council of Ex-Muslims Forum for drawing attention and for the work they do. Please support them and ex Muslims.
Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog
Follow @JPSargeant78
Homo economicus' Weblog 
Theresa May or David Cameron won’t do anything about that. David Cameron (getting tough!) said this: (paraphrased)
“We will identify and stop extremist groups by……..”
I waited for “shutting them down.” But that didn’t come.
What came next was, “…..by empowering those who support democracy.”
He didn’t expand on this, so I wondered if he meant getting different Muslim groups to have a punch-up.
What these preachers usually do, is push the qualification of, “Oh but only in an ideal Islamic state,” as if that actually makes things better for the here and now, but it is usually their get-out clause. In this case, I don’t think that was said, so surely there is a case for those words being reported and someone, somewhere making a decision on prosecution.
But I won’t hold my breath on that.
In a year’s time, these things will still be being pushed in exactly the same way.
Pingback: Video: Ahmadi Persecution In Pakistan | Homo economicus' Weblog
“The incitement to kill those that leave a faith is in clear breach of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Let alone English Law.”
And the muslim world made it emphatically clear in 1990 (the Cairo Declaration) that they put sharia law above the UNDHR. When the OIC gets away with no criticism for rejecting the UNDHR, why do you expect individual muslims to be any different?
The silence of organisations like Amnesty International these past 25 years has given the go ahead to governments, media and muslims to all ignore that sharia law is incompatible with universal human rights.
Pingback: This Easter Remember Asad Shah | Homo economicus' Weblog