TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Afghani faces execution for converting to Christianity
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Afghani faces execution for converting to Christianity

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4831426.stm

quote:

Afghan convert 'faces execution' Abdul Rahman is charged with rejecting Islam and could be executed under Sharia law unless he reconverts. The US made a subdued appeal for him to be allowed to practise his faith - but stressed it did not want to interfere. Germany, Italy and Canada, which all have troops in Afghanistan, also voiced concern over Mr Rahman's plight. Mr Rahman, 41, converted 16 years ago as an aid worker helping refugees in Pakistan. His estranged family denounced him in a custody dispute over his two children. His is thought to be Afghanistan's first such trial, reflecting tensions between conservative clerics and reformists. Conservatives still dominate the Afghan judiciary, four years after the Taleban were overthrown, and Afghanistan's post-Taleban constitution is based on Sharia law. 'Hollow praise' Speaking alongside Afghan Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah at a press conference in Washington, US Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns urged Afghanistan to respect Mr Rahman's religious rights. However, he did not ask for his immediate release and said he respected Afghan sovereignty. Trial judge Ansarullah Mawlazezadah holding the bible he says belonged to Abdul Rahman The trial judge holds the bible he says belonged to the accused "Our government is a great supporter of freedom of religion," Mr Burns said. "As the Afghan constitution affords freedom of religion to all Afghan citizens, we hope very much that those rights, the right of freedom of religion, will be upheld in an Afghan court." Mr Abdullah in turn said he hoped "through our constitutional process there will be a satisfactory result". He said the Afghan embassy in Washington had received hundreds of messages of concern about the case from US citizens. The BBC's Jonathan Beale in Washington says the case has the potential to embarrass the US, which has invested huge efforts and resources in trying to help Afghanistan embrace democracy and freedom. US President George Bush only recently visited Kabul, praising the country's emergence from years of oppression under the Taleban. That message will ring hollow if individuals still face the threat of persecution for their beliefs, our correspondent says. 'Alarming signal' The Italian foreign ministry has said that Mr Rahman's arrest is incompatible with the defence of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Officials in Berlin have also raised his plight, while German Cardinal Karl Lehmann said the case sent an "alarming signal" about freedom of worship. Canada has called on Afghanistan to meet its human rights obligations. Observers say executing a converted Christian would be a significant precedent as a conservative interpretation of Sharia law in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan has a long way to go

nice to see we are defending "freedom"

if anyone deserves citizenship here its this guy. Not that half baked idiot who was trying to extort it.

Good times in Afghanistan!

And they wanted to implement that Sharia law shit here in Canada? Holy fuck.

quote:

Originally posted by VERTiG0 Good times in Afghanistan! And they wanted to implement that Sharia law shit here in Canada? Holy fuck.

that was just political correctness run amok. Abolishing religious courts was about the only good thing mcguinty has done so far

quote:

Originally posted by VERTiG0 Good times in Afghanistan! And they wanted to implement that Sharia law shit here in Canada? Holy fuck.

it would still have to comply with Canadian law...no one would be killed for being a Christian

(FWIW, I don't support allowing it here either as it's ridiculously discriminatory against women)


I see now that the prosecutor is now contemplating not proceding with a trial, stating that the defendent may not be mentally fit. I think this is the convenient "out" that will be used to avoid further outrage in international community. good.

sharia law shouldnt be used because this is canada and we use canadian law. Not simply just because its discriminatory to women. Because in Canada you follow canadian rules and you are prosecuted the canadian way.

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 Because in Canada you follow canadian rules and you are prosecuted the canadian way.

crazy concept

quote:

Originally posted by VERTiG0 Good times in Afghanistan!

lol

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 sharia law shouldnt be used because this is canada and we use canadian law. Not simply just because its discriminatory to women. Because in Canada you follow canadian rules and you are prosecuted the canadian way.

I don't see a problem with using it as alternate mediation, if both parties agree (since independent arbitration is already allowed in for other religious and cultural groups, such as for native peoples)...but it *must* be consistent with Canadian law and it must be entered into by both parties willingly and without duress.

One problem specific to using Sharia law here, some critics say, is the context under which it exists in other countries is itself inconsistent with Canadian law in that women face pressure from their communities and families to agree to it in lieu of going through the regular legal process (i.e. duress/coercion)...and that's unacceptable. At the very least, even independent Legal Aid representation would theoretically better serve the women's interests.

they are at least 500years behind the rest of the humanity

quote:

Originally posted by MarkT I don't see a problem with using it as alternate mediation, if both parties agree (since independent arbitration is already allowed in for other religious and cultural groups, such as for native peoples)...but it *must* be consistent with Canadian law and it must be entered into by both parties willingly and without duress. One problem specific to using Sharia law here, some critics say, is the context under which it exists in other countries is itself inconsistent with Canadian law in that women face pressure from their communities and families to agree to it in lieu of going through the regular legal process (i.e. duress/coercion)...and that's unacceptable. At the very least, even independent Legal Aid representation would theoretically better serve the women's interests.

i do see a problem with it. Every treated equally under the law. No exceptions. If that is unacceptable then you shouldnt have moved here. And independent arbitration was actually outlawed recently and rightly so.

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 i do see a problem with it. Every treated equally under the law. No exceptions. If that is unacceptable then you shouldnt have moved here. And independent arbitration was actually outlawed recently and rightly so.

source?

it's only religious-based arbitration that was not permitted...otherwise, for civil cases, independent arbitration is alive and well.

even in criminal law, there are co-operative efforts to this day between the courts and native groups to allow for trial and sentencing in accordance with native principles.

it's not problematic per se...but if the underlying context is inconsistent with Canadian law, such as women being clearly "2nd class" to men under Sharia law, then yes it is a problem.

if you and I have a civil matter and we both agree, without duress, to accept independent, 3rd party arbitration, that's between us.

Everyone should remember, that no matter how small we open the door for a law to satisfy a particular group, it becomes more difficult to close it once it's open. Once that population befind that little part that's adjar, that law will open like a floodgate.

Setting legal precedents have a HUGE impact on future laws.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/serv...ernational/home

quote:

Afghan clerics demand death for Christian convert DANIEL COONEY Associated Press Kabul � Senior Muslim clerics demanded Thursday that an Afghan man on trial for converting from Islam to Christianity be executed, warning that if the government caves in to Western pressure and frees him, they will incite people to �pull him into pieces.� In unusual moves, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice separately telephoned President Hamid Karzai on Thursday seeking a �favourable resolution� of the case of Abdul Rahman. The 41-year-old former medical aid worker faces the death penalty under Afghanistan's Islamic laws for becoming a Christian. His trial has fired passions in this conservative Muslim nation and highlighted a conflict of values between Afghanistan and its Western backers. �Rejecting Islam is insulting God. We will not allow God to be humiliated. This man must die,� said cleric Abdul Raoulf, who is considered a moderate and was jailed three times for opposing the Taliban before the hard-line regime was ousted in 2001. The trial, which began last week, has caused an international outcry. U.S. President George W. Bush has said he is �deeply troubled� by the case and expects the country to �honour the universal principle of freedom.� Ms. Rice's spokesman, Sean McCormack, said she told Mr. Karzai it is important for the Afghan people to know that freedom of religion is observed in their country. In deference to the country's sovereignty, however, she evidently did not demand specifically that the trial be halted and the defendant released. �This is clearly an Afghan decision,� Mr. McCormack said. �They are a sovereign country.� Still, Ms. Rice's direct appeal to a foreign leader in a judicial proceeding in their own country is an unusual move. German Chancellor Angela Merkel told reporters she had received assurances from Mr. Karzai in a telephone call that Mr. Rahman would not be sentenced to death. �I have the impression that he (Mr. Karzai) has a firm willingness� to abide by the human rights requirements, Ms. Merkel said. �I hope we will be able to resolve this.� Diplomats have said the Afghan government is searching for a way to drop the case. On Wednesday, authorities said Mr. Rahman is suspected of being mentally ill and would undergo psychological examinations to see whether he is fit to stand trial. Three Sunni preachers and one Shiite interviewed by the Associated Press in four of Kabul's most popular mosques said they do not believe Mr. Rahman is insane. �He is not crazy. He went in front of the media and confessed to being a Christian,� said Mr. Hamidullah, chief cleric at Haji Yacob Mosque. �The government is scared of the international community. But the people will kill him if he is freed.� Mr. Raoulf, who is a member of the country's main Islamic organization, the Afghan Ulama Council, agreed. �The government is playing games. The people will not be fooled.� �Cut off his head!� he exclaimed, sitting in a courtyard outside Herati Mosque. �We will call on the people to pull him into pieces so there's nothing left.� He said the only way for Mr. Rahman to survive would be for him to go into exile. But Said Mirhossain Nasri, the top cleric at Hossainia Mosque, one of the largest Shia places of worship in Kabul, said Mr. Rahman must not be allowed to leave the country. �If he is allowed to live in the West, then others will claim to be Christian so they can too,� he said. �We must set an example. ... He must be hanged.� The clerics said they were angry with the United States and other countries for pushing for Mr. Rahman's freedom. �We are a small country, and we welcome the help the outside world is giving us. But please don't interfere in this issue,� Mr. Nasri said. �We are Muslims and these are our beliefs. This is much more important to us than all the aid the world has given us.� Afghanistan's constitution is based on sharia (Muslim law), which is interpreted by many Muslims to require that any Muslim who rejects Islam be sentenced to death. Mr. Hamidullah warned that if the government frees Mr. Rahman, �there will be an uprising� like one against Soviet occupying forces in the 1980s. �The government will lose the support of the people,� he said. �What sort of democracy would it be if the government ignored the will of all the people.� Meanwhile, human-rights group Amnesty International said if Mr. Rahman has been detained solely for his religious beliefs, he would be a �prisoner of conscience.� �The charges against him should be dropped and if necessary he should be protected against any abuses within the community,� the London-based group said in a statement. Mr. Rahman is believed to have lived in Germany for nine years after converting to Christianity while working as a medical aid worker for an international Christian group helping Afghan refugees in Pakistan. He returned to Kabul in 2002. It was not immediately clear when Mr. Rahman's trial will resume. Authorities have barred attempts by the AP to see him, and he is not believed to have a lawyer.

If they do kill this guy i would expect that the international forces would go in and round up every last killer in the area.

Religion of peace my ass....

What ruins religion are the extremists who pervert it.

Well, this dude is now released, because a judge thought he was 'mentally unfit'. Convenient way to get out of having to execute him according to Afghan law.

Dude is now in process of getting an asylum somewhere.

this "event" is nothing new. When Chechenya got its independance from 95-98 and a Shariah Law was established, public executions were held regularly, christians were hung, stoned or shot.
They are fu(ked up people

It's times like this I'm glad that I'm Agnostic....

quote:

Originally posted by Cribby It's times like this I'm glad that I'm Agnostic....

So all the fundamentalists of each religion can call you an infidel?

quote:

Originally posted by EvilTree So all the fundamentalists of each religion can call you an infidel?

indeed lol.

�We are a small country, and we welcome the help the outside world is giving us. But please don't interfere in this issue,� Mr. Nasri said. �We are Muslims and these are our beliefs. This is much more important to us than all the aid the world has given us.�

fucking idiots

quote:

Originally posted by Cribby It's times like this I'm glad that I'm Agnostic....

It's times like this im glad im in Canada

Atheism FTW.

To quote Paavo from Above and Beyond in their Essential Mix:

"ahh... all those wars. Yeah... all those wars are shit-like... and I'm pissed off about religion. Yeah, it's good for people, but at the same time it makes people become bad. I mean, all the wars since ever have always been because of religion. So, that's why I don't like religion... I'm atheist. I think religion can be good for education but it can also be shit for many things. So, you also need it, but when you grow up, you've got to get rid of it."

quote:

Originally posted by DJ_Elyot To quote Paavo from Above and Beyond in their Essential Mix:

About some of the dumbest things ever.

quote:

"ahh... all those wars. Yeah... all those wars are shit-like... and I'm pissed off about religion. Yeah, it's good for people, but at the same time it makes people become bad. I mean, all the wars since ever have always been because of religion.

Greed has been the primary factor in war, followed by power. Religion may be a secondary reason, but never alone enough. (Yeah, even all those 'religious' wars like Crusades and whatnot.

quote:

So, that's why I don't like religion... I'm atheist. I think religion can be good for education but it can also be shit for many things. So, you also need it, but when you grow up, you've got to get rid of it."

If you're going to get rid of religion when you grow old, why would you want to immerse self in it when young?

Influence you have when you are a kid stays a lot your whole life.

Paavo, stick to producing.

I think he was just trying to polite... If he just said "religion is the epitome of human ignorance", then he might offend a few people.

Personally, I don't think any child should be taught religion. Or, they should be exposed to lots of different philosophy, of which theology is only one segment. I've always held the belief that indoctrinating children when they're too young to question their beliefs is just wrong. I mean... it's one thing to teach your kid to obey the law.

Of course... a religion that didn't tell parents to teach it to their children wouldn't last very long... the number of followers would drop dramatically every generation.

^Next time, if you're going to quote someone on a topic like this, make sure it's actually semi intelligent.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.