Afghan man could be executed for becoming Christian

[Sportsdude]

 [DIV id=headline] [H2]Afghan convert to Christianity may be unfit for trial, officials say[/H2]

[DIV id=author] [P class=byline]DANIEL COONEY

 [P class=source]Associated Press and Canadian Press

 [UL class=columnistInfo][/UL]

[DIV id=article style="FONT-SIZE: 100%"] [!-- dateline --]Kabul [!-- /dateline --]— An Afghan man facing a possible death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity may be mentally unfit to stand trial, a state prosecutor said Wednesday.

 Abdul Rahman, 41, has been charged with rejecting Islam, a crime under Afghanistan's Islamic laws. His trial started last week and he confessed to becoming a Christian 16 years ago. If convicted, he could be executed.

 Countries that have troops in Afghanistan have voiced concern about Mr. Rahman's fate.

 [DIV class="bigbox ad" id=boxR] [SCRIPT type=text/XXXXscript ads="1"]aPs="boxR";[/SCRIPT]  [SCRIPT type=text/XXXXscript]var boxRAC = fnTdo('a'+'ai',300,250,ai,'j',nc);[/SCRIPT]

Prosecutor Sarinwal Zamari said questions have been raised about Mr. Rahman's mental fitness.



"We think he could be mad. He is not a normal person. He doesn't talk like a normal person," he told the Associated Press.

 Moayuddin Baluch, a religious adviser to President Hamid Karzai, said Mr. Rahman would undergo a psychological examination.

 "Doctors must examine him," he said. "If he is mentally unfit, definitely Islam has no claim to punish him. He must be forgiven. The case must be dropped."

 A western diplomat in Kabul and a human-rights advocate – both of whom insisted on anonymity – said the government was desperately searching for a way to drop the case because of the reaction it has caused.

 Franklin Pyles, president of the Christian and Missionary Alliance in Canada, said his organization is appalled that Mr. Rahman's life is at risk for converting to Christianity.

 "If we are not going to fight for all freedoms, then what are we doing (in Afghanistan)?"

 The United Church of Canada suggested in a letter to Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay that the government use its position in Afghanistan – 2,200 troops are in the country's south as part of a Canadian-led multinational brigade – to promote human rights.

 These rights include "the rights of Afghans to choose and change religion without fear of losing their lives," the letter says.

 But both Mr. MacKay and Prime Minister Stephen Harper refused to comment on Mr. Rahman's trial.

 Government officials said the case if "of concern," but that additional facts were needed before deciding on a Canadian response.

 The U.S. Bush administration issued a subdued appeal to Kabul on Tuesday to let Mr. Rahman practise his faith in safety.

 Karl Cardinal Lehmann of Germany said the trial sent an "alarming signal" about freedom of worship in Afghanistan.

 The case is believed to be the first of its kind in Afghanistan and highlights a struggle between religious conservatives and reformists over what shape Islam should take there four years after the ouster of the fundamentalist Taliban regime.

 Afghanistan's constitution is based on Sharia (Islamic law), which is interpreted by many to require that any Muslim who rejects Islam be sentenced to death. The state-sponsored Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission has called for Mr. Rahman to be punished, arguing that he clearly violated Islamic law.

 The case has received widespread attention in Afghanistan where many people are demanding that he 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 Mr. Rahman's father, Abdul Manan, in Kabul. "This has brought so much shame."

 Mr. Rahman is believed to have converted to Christianity while a medical aid worker for an international Christian group helping Afghan refugees in the Pakistani city of Peshawar.

 He then moved to Germany for nine years before returning to Kabul in 2002, after the ouster of the hardline Taliban regime.

 Police arrested him last month after discovering him with a Bible during questioning over a dispute for custody of his two daughters. Prosecutors have offered to drop the charges if Mr. Rahman converts back to Islam, but he has refused

 

[Sportsdude]

Time to leave afghanistan. Troops have freed the people and have died so the people could execute a man for practicing a differnt faith. Au revoir, afghanistan, you have just given the anti-war movement in america fuel and the Liberals in Canada fuel for withdrawl.  

[Trollio]

 The case is believed to be the first of its kind in Afghanistan and highlights a struggle between religious conservatives and reformists over what shape Islam should take there four years after the ouster of the fundamentalist Taliban regime.
 
 The ignorance in the media about this case is mind-boggling. Everyone is acting as if this is some new, strange anomaly.
 
 Any perfunctory study of Islam and Islamic history will tell you that there is no way that this is the first case of its kind in Afghanistan. This law goes back to the beginning of the faith, and is found in the most authoritative commentary on Islamic belief.
 
 The man has two choices, either he is insane (because only a crazy person would fail to submit to Allah, right?), or he is a murtad, a willing apostate considered to be worse than an infidel. Anyone who kills a murtad may not be prosecuted under Islamic law. If he is insane, however, he gets a pass on the death sentence and simply gets put away in an asylum.
 
 The only leniency shown here so far is that this whole thing is supposed to happen within 72 hours. (the time from announcing your apostasy to the deadline for you to reconsider before being executed or put away).
 
 I cannot recommend enough that people read Ibn Warraq. Our ignorance about Islam is far more dangerous to our societies than the actions of militant Muslims.
 
 The clash of civilizations is inevitable. Be ready or we lose.  

[tenkani]

Well, at least we got those nasty Taliban out of power. Phew!!

  Yet again we are reminded that you can't simply remove a dictator, impose democracy and expect "freedom" to emerge. What our leaders don't seem to understand is that many folks in the middle east readily submit to theocratic rule and honestly have different values than those we're familiar with.

  So you give them the democratic right to choose their own government...and they choose a theocratic dictatorship...then what?

[soapbox]

be patient the emergence and respect for a secular court system separate and distinct from government will emerge.

  not at the end of a gun barrell during immediate fighting,but the process after the fighting.      

[Schadenfreude]

 So you give them the democratic right to choose their own government...and they choose a theocratic dictatorship...then what?



Send in the Greeks.



 

[soapbox]

     "Yes excellent idea"

[Schadenfreude]

  Then we will live happily ever after.

[tenkani]

Soapbox, your faith doesn't seem to be based on historical precedents.

  The more we (the West) f*cks with the middle east, the more recruits will swarm to radical Islam. It's happening right now. Since I don't think we're going to stop meddling anytime soon, I find it hard to imagine a true democracy forming in Iraq or Afghanistan. And, of course, even if we do stop this idiotic campaign, radical Islam won't go away, it will just lose the best PR campaign its ever had.

  It would be nice to believe that these "problem countries" could be transformed into progressive democratic states with respect for human rights and freedom. Kazakhstan seems to have the right idea. I'm not sure how they made it work. Perhaps because muslims only hold a slim majority?  

[Schadenfreude]

"Die you Christian dog."

[Trollio]

  soapbox wrote:
 [div style="font-style: italic;"]be patient the emergence and respect for a secular court system separate and distinct from government will emerge.[/div]   [div style="font-style: italic;"] [/div]   [div style="font-style: italic;"]not at the end of a gun barrell during immediate fighting,but the process after the fighting.[/div]    
 
 The biggest mistake people make (especially Westerners these days) is the assumption that others, given the opportunity, will think and act like you do. Most of us in our society cannot conceive of a holy war, so we assume that no one else could possibly be serious about it.
 
 This is how civilizations fall; on the assumption that deep down, your enemy is like you. True, he may be human, he may have loves and wants and a need for some mean line of status quo. But he has a completely different way of looking at the world that is not going to go away any more than will the way you look at it. Failing to recognize and understand that inevitably results in big problems.
 
 The idiocy of the American approach to foreign policy is that they assume that everyone really wants to be like them. It doesn't take a genius to sort out how very naïve that is.
 
 It was stupid to give natives paper money 400 years ago; it's just as stupid to think you can give people democracy and have them assign value to it. Especially when you haven't mastered it yourselves.
 [/div]   [div]
   

[tenkani]

Very well said, Trollio.

  I would add that there is a difference between a moderate and radical muslim, just as there is a difference between a moderate and radical christian.

  I also think it's a mistake to assume that they are all completely out of their minds and not worth communicating with. We have to keep the lines open and avoid stupid mistakes like Iraq or we end up pushing a lot of moderates into the radical camp. The last thing we need to do right now is to give zealots (Islamic, Christian or whatever) any help.

[Trollio]

Following up... if the charges are dropped against this guy, anyone who cares about this needs to get him into an unmarked van, burn hell to the airport and get him on a plane out of that country.
 
 As I said earlier: Anyone who kills a murtad (convert out of Islam) may not be prosecuted under Islamic law.
 
 They can drop charges or not drop charges, and they know it. If someone off the street kills him the second he steps out of the courtroom, that person cannot be charged for murder. This has happened numerous times in Islamic nations.
 
   

[Adam_Fulford]

The degenerate influence of the American Taliban-style demogogues such as Pat Robertson and similarly extremist religious fanatics needs to first be curtrailed in the United States if there is any hope of America having a positive influence around the world.