Christian convert faces death penalty in Afghanistan

[pigeonmeister]

Not much coverage of this in the US press

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4831426.stm

Bush had, a few weeks ago, contrasted religous freedom under the ousted Taliban.

"In our country, you can worship freely. You're equally American if you're a Christian, Muslim, Hindu, or Jew. You're equally American if you don't believe in an Almighty. Under the Taliban and Osama bin Laden, there is no religious freedom. You have no chance to express yourself in the public square without being punished. There is no capacity to realize your full potential."

Sadly this isn't good publicity, even if it is certainly not guaranteed that this sentence will be passed. If it is passed, however, then it wouldl be a significant precedent as a conservative interpretation of Sharia law in Afghanistan.

[Feltan]

It was all over the news in the US yesterday, both print and TV.

Fortunately, or unfortunately, the President of Afghanistan doesn't have the ability to direct the actions of the judiciary in that country. As with most things, it is going to take time for that branch of the Afghan government to come to grips with more enlightened thought.

What concerns me is that lawyers for the ACLU in this country might think that is a precident setting sentence.

Regards,
Feltan

[dcmdale]

This story is interesting on several level.

1. Out of a number of similar stories in the region over the last several years, why did this one get picked out for wider distribution? I am not suggesting that it isn't appropriate as a news story, but I wonder if there weren't political motivations in choosing this particular incident. Pakistan has the same law: the rule being that "freedom of religion" means that everyone has the freedom to practice their religon, whatever that is, but changing religions or assisting someone in changing religions is punishable by death. Usually, the sentence is carried out locally and often by the family to rid themselves of the shame. Fundamentalist Hindus in Gujarat have been engaging in forced reconversions and extra-judicial executions of both Christians and Muslims. Christians have been executed under Shariah laws in North Africa. Reporters have been filing stories on these for years and available if you watch the regional newsfeeds, but not picked up by the U.S. news organizations. Why this one? Why Afghanistan? Luck of the draw or politics?

2. The attitude of the guy involved is impressive. He didn't try to deny or hide his Christianity or that he had converted. He is willing to accept execution rather than convert back. He could go free simply by converting back to Islam, but he has chosen not to. Reminds one very much of Polycarp, Justin, and Iraeneus. This guy isn't like the Islamic "Martyrs" going off and blowing up himself and dozens others to show people how he defends his religion.

3. In the Western world, I think that the secular philosophy/belief system/fundamentalism grossly underestimates the strength of religious belief and the committment that people have to their beliefs. People who are willing to hold to their beliefs with a gun at their heads, I suspect, are outside the experience of the average secular American.

[jBirch]

The funny thing now is that they think he must be mad for not reconverting to Islam.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl.../International

James.

[Morion]

Originally Posted by jBirch

The funny thing now is that they think he must be mad for not reconverting to Islam.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl.../International

James.

It is more like they are looking for a way out of this without conceding to one side or the other.

[ReverseLunge]

I really don't see how any of it is important. It's their region so they should do whatever they want over there. Every region has is own local solutions for things that are harmful to it. They can even commit genocide on their own people if they like, it's their house.

[Reepicheap]

How sad. It is apalling how deeply people in the middle east seem to get offended/insulted by others' existence. There is no report of this guy trying to convert his neighbor, which ought to be his freedom, but this is the neighbor's response:

“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 Mr. Rahman's father, Abdul Manan, in Kabul. “This has brought so much shame.”

[ReverseLunge]

Don't go to the middle east.

[jBirch]

Originally Posted by Morion

It is more like they are looking for a way out of this without conceding to one side or the other.

Absolutely. But it isn't it funny which way they are exploring? That to switch from Islam to Christianity you must be either evil or mad. Kinda funny, I thought.

James.

[ReverseLunge]

Originally Posted by Reepicheap

How sad. It is apalling how deeply people in the middle east seem to get offended/insulted by others' existence. There is no report of this guy trying to convert his neighbor, which ought to be his freedom, but this is the neighbor's response:

“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 Mr. Rahman's father, Abdul Manan, in Kabul. “This has brought so much shame.”

I think Abdul is right. Why should any community allow an individual to introduce a destructive element to the group?

[JARS]

How is this guy destructive, It seems that the Musliums are the ones being destructive here as it is they that are trying to exucute him.

[pigeonmeister]

[quote]

Originally Posted by dcmdale

Why this one? Why Afghanistan? Luck of the draw or politics?

Because America has attempted to impose Western political and libertarian values on areas that have been ruled for centuries through various tribal or local custom/law. A few weeks ago Bush tried to contrast life and religious freedom under the Taliban to life now. This piece has obviously been picked up on to illustrate an alternative view and show the limits of American efforts to try deliver a non sharia based political system. It is politically motivated in that sense, but i think that this was the first such case in the country- and so was perhaps deemed more newsworthy. One case shouldn't, however, provide anybody with enough infomation to make a definitive judgement on religious freedom in Afghanistan.

The attitude of the guy involved is impressive. He didn't try to deny or hide his Christianity or that he had converted. He is willing to accept execution rather than convert back.

Yea this was popular during heretical burnings of 16th century Europe. I don't know if I could describe it as impressive, but certainly he has the courage of his convictions.

People who are willing to hold to their beliefs with a gun at their heads, I suspect, are outside the experience of the average secular American.[/

Holding a gun to someone elses head, in order to hold to their beliefs, however...

[Gav]

Because America has attempted to impose Western political and libertarian values on areas that have been ruled for centuries through various tribal or local custom/law. A few weeks ago Bush tried to contrast life and religious freedom under the Taliban to life now. This piece has obviously been picked up on to illustrate an alternative view and show the limits of American efforts to try deliver a non sharia based political system. It is politically motivated in that sense, but i think that this was the first such case in the country- and so was perhaps deemed more newsworthy. One case shouldn't, however, provide anybody with enough infomation to make a definitive judgement on religious freedom in Afghanistan.

Actually PM if I remember [correctly] there was a progressive and democratic (or at least very moderate Islamic) government in power prior to the Soviet invasion. That invasion, followed by that insurgency ... sorry fight for freedom, mixed with a generous dose of Civil War (post Soviet) is what created the Taliban. Their popularity arose because they could give the country a peace ... of sorts.

[ReverseLunge]

Originally Posted by JARS

How is this guy destructive, It seems that the Musliums are the ones being destructive here as it is they that are trying to exucute him.

How would your church react if one of its members started coming to church toting a Satanic bible?

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by ReverseLunge

How would your church react if one of its members started coming to church toting a Satanic bible?

It wouldn't be by putting him to death. Burning heretics went out of style years ago.

[ReverseLunge]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

It wouldn't be by putting him to death. Burning heretics went out of style years ago.

But you would have to eliminate him from your community. Every region has its own solutions.

[pigeonmeister]

Originally Posted by Gav

Actually PM if I remember [correctly] there was a progressive and democratic (or at least very moderate Islamic) government in power prior to the Soviet invasion. That invasion, followed by that insurgency ... sorry fight for freedom, mixed with a generous dose of Civil War (post Soviet) is what created the Taliban. Their popularity arose because they could give the country a peace ... of sorts.

Sort off. There was a reasonably progressive government that ruled between 1973-78. It died (well was murdered) when the Marxist 'People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan' decided to take over in a bloody revolution in 1978. They were obviously quite close to the Soviets. They replaced religious and traditional laws with secular and Marxist ones, banning tribal courts, and land reform. Men were obliged to cut their beards, women couldn't wear a burqa. They also invited the Soviet Union to Afghanistan to assist its programme.

The reason my point stil stands is that the Soviet Invasion was the result of a Islamist/tribal/traditionalist backlash by people who didn't want traditional forms of authority eroded by atheist marxism or socialist land reform. The Afghan government couldn't control these forces (or Mujahadeen) and so Russia invaded and installed a pro-Moscow government.

Amid the huge chaos of Russia's withdrawal, the Mujahadeen split into ethnic groups. Pashtun Taliban and non-Pashtun Northern Alliance. They had a war, the Taliban over-ran Kabul.

So you could say that a lack of Pashtun representation in the interim Kabul government, a history of war lordism, marxist attempts to ride a horse and cart through Afghan tribal system and get rid of Islam, as well as Russian imperialism all created the Taliban. However I would say that their popularity arose because they were a) Pashtun and b) because they represented a return to tribal and religious authority (of the kind the 'progressive' regimes had tried to curb). Another way of looking at is that the Taliban didn't win a popularity contest- they just won the civil war in the areas that were mainly Pashtun (i.e Kabul and Khandahar)

[jBirch]

Here's the latest from the G&M:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...rnational/home

The question which springs to my mind is whether this guy should be killed in order to keep the peace. Sacrifice one for the betterment of the many, as it were.

James.

[ReverseLunge]

Originally Posted by jBirch

Here's the latest from the G&M:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...rnational/home

The question which springs to my mind is whether this guy should be killed in order to keep the peace. Sacrifice one for the betterment of the many, as it were.

James.

Whatever they do with him will be the right thing for them.

[jBirch]

Originally Posted by ReverseLunge

Whatever they do with him will be the right thing for them.

Not necessarily. They might end up doing what they think is the right thing for the foreigners in their land, or what they think is the right thing for their neighbours, which is kind of my concern. What will happen in Afghanistan if they do something that isn't the right thing for them?

James.