Understanding the Death Fatwa on Taslima Nasreen

Re: # 80, Kaalchakra,

``We need a balance of views promoting real Islam here, if not nothing else, then just for improving understanding.``

I second your proposal. But there are many sites doing this, i.e. `promoting Islam` for spreading hatred/fanaticism or just for `understanding`. Chowk should do something more innovative. It should ban Indians and Hindoos from visiting this site or at least it should not publish their articles and bar them from interacting. What do you think?

Samar

Excellent suggestion, samar1982. That would immediately minimize the number of possible sources of both distraction and error.

Re: # 81

I think the problem is with non-Muslims period. They should be banned from chowk and hopefully one day from the entire planet earth. That will be when the whole world has embraced Islam because it is the only right way to live.

This is where this mindset leads to.


Killing someone because of their opinion is ridiculous. Besides why should Taslima be killed instead of Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, Michael Savage, Daniel Pipes etc etc... The fatwas against Taslima add credence to the hate mondering of the above mentionned individuals who mock Islam often to justify acts of unwarranted aggression against Muslims.

I am not raising my points to undermine sovereignty of Pakistan or wholesale dismissal of Islam. I believe that all religions are paradigms for man to understand his place in hte universe. I really don`t believe any religion is right. The abrahamic religions are more problematic in hte sense they advocate an omniscient omnipotent god who created humans etc etc... so silly. If he/she is so powerful why not a Mohammed/Christ for every culture so no one misses salvation. Ostensibly South Americans coudn`t be Muslims if they never even heard of it. Besides this god would have to be sick to watch this human drama with all the suffering and injustice unfold and watch back like it is some soap opera.

eastmwest

``That will be when the whole world has embraced Islam because it is the only right way to live.

This is where this mindset leads to.``

Are you suggesting, eastmwest, that that mindset, and not the fatwas or the killings by a few, is the problem facing mankind today?

Honoring my own request, I will make this the last of my posts on this board, but must say, that is the most disrespectful and vain claim anyone has ever made in relation to God and His Prophets. Hopefully, you will reconsider while God, either Himself or by advising His own people, still gives you time on earth.

The problem with Taslima Nasreen is not here disbelief in her religion but as Bangla deshi why she should be treated any differently by hindu state India while many Bangla deshis ae treated as foreigners

#85 by tolkinin on April 17, 2007 1:21pm PT


fair enough...but if taslima nasreen is kicked out because her visa expired, the 20million or so bangladeshis illegals should be kicked out too..

63 by abu_safwaan

“My contention is that Islam should not blamed for the stupidities of Muslims. Islam is not responsible for individual absurdities not even for collective ones for that matter.It can only be responsible for what`s in Quran and the authentic sunnah of the Prophet (PBUH).”

The case that the author has quoted for Asma Bint Marwan is straight out of Sirat e Rasul Allah by Ibn Ishaq perhaps the most authentic of all sirah books ever written. The translation I am referring to is by A. Guillaume again the most notable of such translations and the para that he assigns to event in the original text is 996. Please check it out for yourself.

Re: # 87

When the same Ibne-Ishaq makes a case that Prophet (PBUH) was a true prophet and perhaps that greatest human being that ever graced this earth he becomes a liar and lunatic for writing such hogwash, but if you are able to use his quote for ur own demented agenda then everything that comes out of his mouth is a flowing river of truth! Unless you happen to have a videotape of that incident you should brush it aside with the same cavalary that you reserve for the rest of the contents of that book by Ibn-e-Ishaq. Wahh abbassi sahab..meetha meetha hup hup, kadwa kadwa thoo thoo. I would urge you to do a lil research on ur beloved mirza qadiyani, there are ample skeletons in that closet, moonh naa hii khulwayein to behtar hayy.

But let me go ahead and answer this quandry that I have addressed several times before. Majority of any society has the right to decide what they consider as crime and what the punishment of that crime would be, its called democracy, look it up. Lets suppose 1500 years ago once the state of medina was formed, the law dictated that anyone who disrespected ANY prophet would be executed then if the majority of the society agrees with it the how is it any different than the draconian Patriot act that was enforced on me even though i dont agree with it one bit but i abide by it. The reason is because the proponents of that law has the majority on their side so they will enforce laws that they deem appropriate. I illustrated an example that in europe you can be put in jail for merely discussing/questioning the intensity of holocaust. For all intent and purpose a society can make nose-picking a crime punishable with death, provided that the majority is against gold-digging.

#63, abu_safwan,

“My contention is that Islam should not blamed for the stupidities of Muslims. Islam is not responsible for individual absurdities not even for collective ones for that matter.``

Does that mean after converting to Islam their genes too got changed and people became lunatics. Then they started producing deranged, imbecile, incorrigible, insane offsprings. You are spot on here! We are one billion strong force of idiots who resort to such `stupidities` that others start blaming Islam rather then ourselves. What a thought provoking `contention!`

Samar

Taslima is just a dumb idiot woman who got carried away to get a cheap fame and wishes to take advantage of the current global hatred for Muslims...................

But, in the end she became victim herslef.....what you do , coems back to you....always get ready for backfire............

When dumb people do something like this, they do not even think about the consequences, and latter they hide themselves..............

If, they are brave and courageous then they should face the hatred of those people whose feelings they deliberately hurt by insulting their beloved religions.........................

They then should`nt be crying wolf............they should fight back with same stand..........and then get ready to be attacked..............

First they show rebel and pseudo courage by insulting religions and religious figures and when they get reaction to their own violent actions, then they start blaming those people who love their ideology and they do not allow others to insult their religions............

For them their ideology is more dearer than their own families..............

Taslima is responsible for all this chaos that she created for her own selfish motives.................

Re: # 88

abu sufyan,

do you realize how silly you sound when you say things like ``Majority of any society has the right to decide what they consider as crime and what the punishment of that crime would be, its called democracy, look it up ?!!!``.......... are you saying that, anouzobillah, we should hold the prophet (pbuh and his camel) to the same standard as george bush and shaukat aziz? .......... we expect better from a man who talked to a winged messenger from al-lah in a dark cave and then flew off on a winged horse to talk to the big kahuna himself ......... his words and deeds are supposed to be the gold standard for mankind to follow till the end of time - how could they be subject to the whims and fancies of unwashed bedouins ?

.......... and if god could send down a verse allowing the prophet to marry his son`s wife, why couldn`t he send down a verse or two asking people not to kill somone just because they didn`t like what they said ?......... if al-lah mian had done that we wouldn`t have needed things like the first ammendment and the aclu .......... slavery is another example: most good muslims like you are quick to point out that a black man rode into medina on a camel led by mo of mecca - fine, that was really nice of him ! .......... but then why didn`t he come out and ban slavery outright ?!.........now, you might say that the people would not have passed that bill and blah blah blah, but then how many verses of the koran did the people get to vote on ? ......... of course the people wouldn`t have liked it, specially the people that mattered and who the prophet wanted to win over to his cause - that puts him in the same league as ayub khan and failure to implement land reforms ......... we expect perfection from the seal of the prophets .......

...... this whole notion that islam was a big improvement over what was prevailing in the bedouin jahaliya might very well be true, but it is hogwash if the man claimed to be a prophet who was bringing the ultimate truth that was to guide mankind till the end of time ........ if this is the best he could manage then i am afraid the he was either talking to the wrong god, or the man`s character was deeply flawed .......... heck, tehsin abbassi would make a better prophet - the man not only washes his bum, he uses toilet paper before he does so ..............

``Islam should not blamed for the stupidities of Muslims.``

this sentence is almost blashphemous and can potentially make islam irrelvent. by corollary, one can then deduce that islam should not be praised for any of the achievements of muslims (and dhimmis) in the golden era of islam.

safwan#88:

``Majority of any society has the right to decide what they consider as crime and what the punishment of that crime would be, its called democracy, look it up. Lets suppose 1500 years ago once the state of medina was formed, the law dictated that anyone who disrespected ANY prophet would be executed then if the majority of the society agrees with it the how is it any different than the draconian Patriot act that was enforced on me even though i dont agree with it one bit but i abide by it.``

You might want to rethink what you said. What about if the Christian societies, where many of us living, decide that anyone who questions Jesus being the son of God should be executed?

The plain fact that many religious people forget is that all religions -or almost all- are blasphemous towards other religions and, especially, against atheists.

Re: # 93

dost-mittar,

.... you cannot compare a society`s decisions with those handed down by god and his chosen prophets - it is comparing apples to oranges ............ we expect divine beings to be perfect, always ..... the bottom line is that there is something horribly wrong with any ideology that considers free speech to be a bigger crime than killing somone ......... it is awfully difficult to respect, much less worship, any god or prophet who demands that we kill the person who insults him .....

#88 by abu_safwaan

“When the same Ibne-Ishaq makes a case that Prophet (PBUH) was a true prophet and perhaps that greatest human being that ever graced this earth he becomes a liar and lunatic for writing such hogwash”

Not at all! I hold both Ibn e Ishaq and Al Tabri in very high esteem. They took their historiography very seriously and stuck to reporting as accurately as possible what ever they learnt. They made sure that for every statement they provided the source and the entire transmission chain (isnad) and never made any judgmental statements, leaving it up to the reader to make their own conclusions.

“Majority of any society has the right to decide what they consider as crime and what the punishment of that crime would be, its called democracy”

I think you have a mistaken notion of what democracy means. May be you should take an introductory course in civics or political science to correct this deficiency. The Romans over 2000 years ago realized that every form of government whether it be a king, the rule of aristocracy (group) or democracy (people) had an evil twin. King could degenerate into a tyrant, the aristocracy could degenerate into an oligarchy and democracy can degenerate into mob rule. Each form of the good has its benefits, so they found an excellent solution to take the best of all the 3 forms and prevent their degeneration into their evil twin. America emulates Rome in this respect. The Consul who was appointed for a year was like a king and in our age it is the President. The Senate is the aristocracy which is largely what it is today and the people got to vote for their representatives as well as the Consul which would be our equivalent of elections for the assemblies and the President. But democracy does not mean tyranny of the majority and that is prevented through the constitution whereby the rights of the minority are protected. So even though an assembly can pass legislation or the president can enact edicts which may infringe upon the rights of the minority they can be prevented from becoming law by the Supreme Court. ACLU or other civil rights organizations can challenge the legislation in court and stop it from being implemented. So my friend your right to pick your nose is protected under numerous statutes.

``Majority of any society has the right to decide what they consider as crime and what the punishment of that crime would be, its called democracy, look it up.``

This has to be the stupidest, the most simplistic and intellectually weak definition of democracy I have ever read. If this charachter passes for an Islamic intellectual, it is no wonder that Muslim society by and large is in a stage of jahalat.