Islam and its apostates: kill all, or kill only some?

[EduChris]

Some questions for Muslims:

What does the Qur'an teach about killing those who convert from Islam to another faith?

What do the Islamic haddiths depict Mohammad as teaching about the execution of those who convert from Islam to another faith?

What does Islamic Sharia law say about killing those who convert from Islam to another faith?

How does all of this relate to the Qur'anic insistance that there should be "no compulsion" in religion?

[EduChris]

...what went before simply cannot be dismissed. Why? Because the legal rules are binding. They bind muslims still. Rulings down the centuries make Islâmic jurisprudence exactly like Common Law (Fataawa, plural of fatwa, basically legal edicts based on Islâmic law) as opposed to only statutory or regulatory laws (Qur’ân and Ahadith)!

But why do they not simply say, "There is no compulsion in religion"? Why do Islamic rulers not just admit that any prior ruling that did not take this into account is null and void?

Are you saying that Muslims are incapable of admitting their mistakes and starting over again with a clean slate? It seems to me that the cognitive dissonance between "No compulsion in religion," on the one hand, and "Slay the infidels, apostates, and blasphemers" is so great that sooner or later there will have to be an Islamic reformation.

[Murad]

The punishment for apostasy varies according to what Sharia the state chooses to follow.

In the current time we live in, all the countries differ in Sharia, some are considered 'extremists' and some are conisdered 'modernist' etc etc.. and thus they choose to interpret Islamic texts 'differently' or give one Islamic text 'authority' over the other.

For example gay marriage is legal in Indonesia. And Indonesia is the largest concentration of muslims in the world.

And in Saudi arabia, Homosexuality can get you stoned to death or hanged.

Big difference, but both countries are still muslim.

So it really depends on what the government chooses to do.

What we know for a fact is that during the time of the Khilafah(Islamic Empire), conversions to Islam and conversions from Islam were everywhere and that non-muslims under Islamic rule were treated better than any Muslim 'infidel' under Christian rule and certainly better than any Muslim under Jewish rule.

[EduChris]

The punishment for apostasy varies according to what Sharia the state chooses to follow...they choose to interpret Islamic texts 'differently' or give one Islamic text 'authority' over the other...

Okay, but why not make a monumental change and say that the Qur'anic ideal of "no compulsion in religion" is finally going to be treated as the primary authority in Islam?

...gay marriage is legal in Indonesia. And Indonesia is the largest concentration of muslims in the world.

Can you give us a reference for this claim? Here is one reference I've found that seems to contradict your statement: 100 Lashes in Indonesia.

What we know for a fact is that during the time of the Khilafah(Islamic Empire), conversions to Islam and conversions from Islam were everywhere and that non-muslims under Islamic rule were treated better than any Muslim 'infidel' under Christian rule and certainly better than any Muslim under Jewish rule.

I would dispute your "facts" here; but either way, there's no denying that Muslims are currently treated much better in the West than Christians or Jews are treated (or ever have been treated) in Muslim-majority countries. And that will continue to be the case until Islam has a reformation that breaks completely with the past in order to finally realize the Qur'anic ideal of "no compulsion in religion."

[Fatihah]

Though I am a muslim, I was born, raised and continue to reside in the U.S.

My apologies for assuming otherwise.

Adressing the stance of women being inferior to men in islam, I have never suggested so. In islam, laws are prescribed according to the nature of men and women. In islam, muslims believe that there is a difference in nature between males and females which is not only physical strength but a difference in temperment. Males are created to be not as sensative as women. For example, a male will likely engage in physical altercations than women because a woman's sensativity prevents them from likely causing physical hurt or pain to someone as a man would. This the difference identified in islam between men and women. As far as intelligence and ither things, we are equal.

If women are not inferior, then how can it be acceptable for husbands to administer punishment to them? Is it likewise acceptable for wives to use physical force as a means of punishing the husband, if she happens to be physically stronger than he is?

Lastly, to address women in the army, my statement was not incorrect. As there has never been an all female regiment on the battlefield in any war. There are women in the armies and may have participated in battle, but the whole regiment was not females. This was just stated to show that even western societies acknowledge the difference in nature between men and women.

Yes, that's true. Women are not as strong physically as men, in general. Also, I agree that men and women generally have different temperaments (though like all generalizations, this has exceptions). As I said above, I don't see how these differences have any bearing on whether a man may use bodily force against his wife.

Response: It is not a case of inferiority, for inferior means that a woman has lower rank or status then men. Such is not the case in islam. However, men and women have different responsibilities in islam, which are based on the difference in nature between men and women. Since women are physically weaker and more sensative then men, the responsibility for women to use physical contsct to discipline a man would have no affect. For a man can easily prevent her from touching him because he's stronger. That is why the responsibility is given to men and not women. Not because of inferiority, but because of the difference in responsibility in which the responsibility is based on the difference in nature between men and women.

There are benefits that women enjoy which men do not because of their responsibilites as well, such as not being obligated to work. In islam, since men are physically stronger and less emotional, Allah has obligated that men are to work to finance the home and not women. That is to protect women from being attacked or molested when out of the home by men.This also keeps a parent home to raise the children. A man must work and support the family. A woman can collect money from her husband and not spend it on anyone. This benefit allows women to become wealthy without lifting a finger. Would this make men inferior to women? Not at all. But this is the benefit a woman enjoys due to her responsibilities dependent upon her nature.

[LiamOS]

What if a big, burly woman marries a puny man?
Do some of these things reverse?

[Fatihah]

Obviously the Qur'an and the Islamic haddiths and the Sharia law are so muddled and unclear that Muslims will never be able to decide whether all, or only some, apostates should be killed. Muslims can't even agree among themselves what an "apostate" is.

That’s simplifying the situation too much. Islâm was whatever Muhammad made it, and as you can see by teachings throughout his lifetime, it changed in what it was. I’m not interested in people talking about ‘abrogation’, etc. I’m simply stating what happened.

After that his companions took over.

Following their demise ruling bodies had to rely on examples of their predecessors’ actions and sayings, but also use these for new rulings because they encountered new situations never encountered before.

As with any culture that spreads wide and far after being born from a small and local core, people have interpreted what went before differently. In previous ages muslims were at war with Christians, so it was ok in society to go with the hardline verses.

Nowadays, people want to integrate, and so feel embarrassed by these more extreme views. So they reinterpret things more gently (wife–beating with a feather or toothbrush? Oh please! Muhammad hit his child bride so hard in the chest it caused her pain!), verses on Jihad, etc.

I have no problem with this and agree that Islâm badly needs a reformation. However, what went before simply cannot be dismissed. Why? Because the legal rules are binding. They bind muslims still. Rulings down the centuries make Islâmic jurisprudence exactly like Common Law (Fataawa, plural of fatwa, basically legal edicts based on Islâmic law) as opposed to only statutory or regulatory laws (Qur’ân and Ahadith)!

Response: Islam does not need reformation as islam is perfect as it is. What actually needs reformation is the propaganda used by non-muslims, such as your claim of integrating meaning to justify wife-beating when in actuality it's non-muslims finding excuses to dismiss the fact that islam does teach a light tap. Concerning Muhammad hitting Aisha, Muhammad did not hit her with intent to use pain to correct Aisha's behavior, as you desperately try to suggest. For had you read all hadiths, you would have known that the strike in which Muhammad used was used on others as well which was a miraculous healing affect to remove doubt. It was not a srike in which an abusive husband uses. When Muhammad used the healing affect on Aisha, it happened to cause her pain. It is not abuse if one feels pain while being healed. If that was the case, all doctors should be considered abusive.

[Fatihah]

What if a big, burly woman marries a puny man?
Do some of these things reverse?

Response: Not at all. For there is still a difference in temperment between men and women. So even a woman who is physically stronger than a man, a woman's temperment is not likely to incline to fighting like a man would. As the saying goes, it's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog.

[LiamOS]

What if the woman has all the traits considered normally masculaine?

[Fatihah]

What if the woman has all the traits considered normally masculaine?

Response: I don't know what masculine traits you're referring too, but whatever they are, islam does not prescribe a woman to use physical contact as a way to discipline a man for any reason.

[LiamOS]

So, all things equal, women are inferior, in that they can not respond physically under any circumstances.