Why do some Muslims believe that blasphemers should be killed?

[vetuste_ennemi]

I understand that some Islamic countries prescribe the death penalty for blasphemy. Is this because Sharia ordains it? If you are a Muslim do you agree with this?

[NOX]

I'm not a Muslim but most holy books of most religions also prescribe this- we tend not to act on it anymore- but it is prescribed.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Yes, Nox, but it's not the law of the land.

[douglas9401]

Or.....they're lunatics but we all have to dance around it for fear of upsetting anyone.

[d9f1c7]

Like all religions they have their share of hard line bigots who maintain a position so weak that it will not stand debate. Any form of dissent therefore is seen as an insult to the while belief system and hence death to the purpetrator is justified. Most religions paradoxically have a "life is sacred" clause but it seems that it is the first thing out of the window when someone doesn't agree with the "correct" brand of fairy tale.

Islam is the focus at the moment but they are not unique, as a fairly new religion I guess they are going through their "Spanish inquisition" phase and are thus doing the sorts of things done by Christians centuries ago.

[keyplus90]

Sharia nowhere ordains death penalty for blasphemy. It is misconception even in few Muslims and then media propagates it a bit too much.

[vetuste_ennemi]

It's sadder than that, D9f1c7. Islamic civilisation 1,000 years ago from Baghdad in the east to Cordoba in the west was noted for religious tolerance and the promotion of science. Now they're going backwards.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Keyplus, thanks for your reply. Two questions: first, if it's not prescribed by Sharia then why is the death penalty prescribed in some Islamic countries? Second, do you agree or disagree with these countries?

[ludwig]

// Sharia nowhere ordains death penalty for blasphemy. //

What are the penalties?

[SeaJayPea]

The simple answer to the question you ask as your title is because that's what they've been taught.

In the same way that there are thousands of kids in the USA who are taught that God created the Earth in six days just over 4000 years ago. And that it's OK to kill gynaecologists if you think they've carried out abortions.

And that it's OK to kill Protestants/Catholics/Sunnis/Shias because you don't agree with the way they 'worship'.

And don't lose sight of the fact that we used to execute blasphemers in this country not that many centuries ago. We only did away with anti-blasphemy laws in 2008 after somebody tried to use it to prosecute the BBC over the Jerry Springer fiasco.

Religions. Who'd have them?

[keyplus90]

vetuste_ennem ////iIt's sadder than that, D9f1c7. Islamic civilisation 1,000 years ago from Baghdad in the east to Cordoba in the west was noted for religious tolerance and the promotion of science. Now they're going backwards.////

And the simple reason for that is that they gave up the teachings of Quran. When they acted upon Quran and hadith, Muslims were what you mentioned 1000 years ago. And it is written very clearly in the Quran itself that the way to success is with Quran and way of Prophet (pbuh). What really happened was that few centuries ago Muslims started trying to copy West due to their success after industrial revolution. There is nothing wrong in learning from others, but few things in Islam are final and no one has right to change them. While doing that they ended up mixing everything. And the answer to your second question to me depends upon that too. Few countries apply death penalties on the basis of their own legislation that again are the mixture of Islamic idea which they tried to dilute (not Islamic Shraia) and laws to please rest of the world. By doing that they ended up in two boats at the same time and now are unable to please anyone. If they try changing what they presented their people as Islam then they end up in trouble at home and then they are reminded on regular basis by the Western countries that they should not bring in the Sharia. But the one thing none of them is unable to think what you mentioned in your above post. Muslims and rest of the world would be better off with proper Sharia and not the diluted version.

[naomi24]

//Muslims and rest of the world would be better off with proper Sharia and not the diluted version.//

If you want it, Keyplus, you have a free choice - and fortunately, so do we.

[vetuste_ennemi]

5.00 pm. Off shift now, Keyplus: Naomi's taken over. Jom comes on at about 1.00 am.
.

[naomi24]

Enjoy the Cava! Hic!

[jomifl]

A bit off thread but a lighthearted (?) take on the topic
http://s1.wp.com/wp-c...ges/bg_header_overlay

[jomifl]

Or not ;-)

[jomifl]

Try this instead;
http://creepingsharia...d-cartoon-collection/

[keyplus90]

Fender – Sharia law will not incorporate worldwide until Muslims will adopt it first where they already call themselves to have Islamic law. In countries where there is Muslim majority there Muslims must (and I repeat MUST) abide by the local law until the local law forces them to do something against their basic belief. If that happens then they should migrate to where there are no restrictions and this itself is according to the Quran (Sharia). Do I believe its civilised? Yes I have no doubt that Sharia law gives solution to all of the social problems. Few individuals may not be happy but Islam cares for society and not the individual if a choice has to be made. Then all of the individuals will never be happy does not matter what law you bring in. I don’t think there are any parts of Quran that do not belong to 21st century. Basic human needs are always same and apart from the things that have been given clearly in Quran (that will fit in any given time or century and will give result) there is clear flexibility in Islam and would always be practical. Quran declared alcohol Haram (not allowed) 1400 years ago and David Cameron is thinking now about making it difficult for people to get drunk because it is damaging society, economy, health, family and many more aspect of our lives. Perhaps he should ban it altogether. Sooner or later someone would think about it, I have no doubt.

[keyplus90]

/////In countries where there is Muslim majority there Muslims must (and I repeat MUST)////

Sorry it should read as minority and not majority.