Pakistani Christians are receiving threats from the Taliban to convert to Islam or die. Here we see the difference between radical and traditional Islam. In traditional Islam it is never acceptable to force anyone to convert. The Koran says "there shall be no compulsion in religion" and this has been understood, by all the mainstream schools, to mean that one should freely choose to become a Muslim. No Muslim empire has historically enforced mass conversion.
Typically Muslim empires have distinguished between conquering a country and bringing it under Islamic rule and law--this is allowed--and forcing people to become Muslims--this is not allowed. The Islamic radicals, in trying to compel conversions on pain of death, are breaking with the Koran and the Islamic tradition. Only two schools of Koranic interpretation--the Bin Laden school and the Robert Spencer school--consider Taliban-style "convert or die" jurisprudence to be consistent with what the Prophet Muhammad taught and what the Koran says.
There is a problem with traditional Islam, but it doesn't concern converting in but rather converting out. Classical Islam allows voluntary entry into Islam, but once you're in you cannot leave. Indeed the traditional remedy for apostasy is death. (No wonder Rushdie got into so much trouble.) I don't think this is consistent with any Western understanding of religious freedom. Fortunately there are traditional Muslims like Tariq Ramadan who are calling for a reassessment of these teachings, not in the name of secularism or liberalism but in the name of a renewed Islam that is well adapted to the needs of the twenty-first century.
Islam is growing worldwide, as is Christianity. What we have here is what Hayek once called "a framework of competing utopias." The faith that wins is not the one that bullies its opponents but the one that wins them over with hope for a better life. No other religions have the evangelical power of Islam and Christianity. Buddhism seems only to be growing among disaffected Europeans, and in Hollywood. HInduism and Judaism don't even aspire to make converts. If traditional Muslims want Christians to protect their rights in Christian countries, they must protect Christians from the assaults of the radicals in Muslim countries. Bush should convey this message to General Musharraf and to the Muslims of Pakistan.
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 4)
1. There are not two Islams. The Quran calls for the death of all infidels - all non-Muslims - and it is the publicly proclaimed agenda of all Muslims to take over the world. This falso dichotomy of "traditional" vs "radical" Islam is just a deception to lull us into a false sense of security as they little by little begin imposing THEIR religion on us while Christian doctrine is despised. We need to wake up and smell the coffee, people. Islamists are quite open and consistent about their intentions; we are the ones who deceive ourselves by marginalizing the threat they pose.
Mary Joan at 12:14PM on May 17th 2007
2. I totally agree with Dinesh and his report and believe that President Bush should intervene and impress on the powers that be that the Christians need protection.
The U.S. is giving from our very own families to make a strong military statement against terrorism in any country this also should also apply to those who would terrorize others as an attempt to force them into converting from their Christianity.
President Bush is a christian man and hopefully will realize that as a Western civilization our forefathers fought so that we may have the right to freedom of religion and although sadly even in some US states the right to freedom of religion given to us as US citizens has been tampered with and even taken away in many cases those in foreign countries, if we are to try to bring democracy to them, should be allowed those same religious freedom and protected in their decisions.
Sherri I at 12:25PM on May 17th 2007
3. Do me a huge favor, Mary Joan. Don't use plural first person pronouns. It makes you look like you're lumping the rest of the sane Christians in with yourself. There are radical and mainstream Islamic people just as there are radicals of any faith. I have a number of Islamic friends, and none of them have ever treated me as less than that. I don't believe in their faith, and they don't believe in mine, but neither one of us have persecuted the other for their beliefs. And just out of curiosity, when have you EVER had a Muslim "impose" their beliefs on you?
To the author, I appreciated the entry, and God bless you.
Joseph at 12:39PM on May 17th 2007
4. Radical Christians are not killing people by the thousands. see www.thereligionofpeace.com nor do they give you a choice of convert or die. There will never be peace until Islam is wiped off the face of this earth.
harvey at 12:54PM on May 17th 2007
5. I normally don't like Dinesh D'Souza but at least he's on the money with this one.
Can we send the Mary Joans and Robert Spencers of the world to go fight the Taliban? Maybe they will annhiliate each other and the rest of the world can live in peace.
nkvisoko21 at 1:18PM on May 17th 2007
6. Islam IS radical, in countries that are predominately Muslim, such as Pakistan, Indonesia, the Maylaysian archipeligo, Sudan, and other parts of Africa where Muslims can get away with it with impunity, and are becoming more militant in countries that have high Muslim immigration, such as France and Britain,and have even begun to act out some of these agressions, as well as affecting political policies.
Canada, for example has made the foolish mistake of allowing Muslims to practice their own Sharia Law in one province of Ontario.
As for Pakistan, this so called news is "old news". Severe persecution of Christians has been going on ever since Pakistan has been predominately Muslim, yet you hear very little about it on the news, and the government does little if anything to protect Christians, even when murders, bombings of churches, rapes and/or kidnapping of young girls who are then forced into marriages with Muslim men, sometimes 3 or 4 times their age and the most outrageous atrocities are committed.
These things are an everyday occurance in Pakistan. Why this particular item just hit the news is surprising to me, since I have been following weekly reports of these persecutions for years now.
Christians are relegated to the most menial jobs, and live in abject poverty. False accusations against them, such as blaspheming the "prophet" Mohammad, or the Quran are commonplace and the punishment is either death or immprisonment. A Christians testimony in a so called court of law is considered worthless.
Christians in Pakistan have to lay their lives on the line to practice their faith, which is real and vital, as opposed to the superficial mainstream version of Christianity in the United States. I wonder how many American Christians would stand the test of faith that Pakistan Christians every day of their lives.
But that aside, Mr. D'Souza, you are wrong, dead wrong about there being two sides of Islam. There is only one. It's just that where Muslims can get away with doing what they want to do and what their religion calls for, that Muslims persecutiing Christians becomes a blood sport. If the United States were predominately Muslim, with a Muslim government, (Sharia Law), you would see the exact same thing going on as in Pakistan.
Please stop deceiving yourself and others, and face the very real facts.
Barbara D at 1:19PM on May 17th 2007
7. To Mary Joan, you have a point about there not being two Islams, but you must keep in mind that there are more than one type of people practicing. The traditional Muslims are just like every other peaceful person on this Earth, but there are also those who feel the need to kill in the name of their God. The latter people are very dangerous. But this is not specific to Islam either. Let's not forget that Christianity is guilty of doing the same things hundreds of years ago during that little stint we read about in history class called the Inquistion, then there were also the Crusades too. There is a long history here that goes back long before 9/11. Finally, speak for yourself, as a Christian myself, I do not feel threatened by Muslims, nor have I ever been. I am, however, concerned with psychpathic and sociopathic people who refuse to get with the times and kill in the name of God. No matter who is doing these things for what ever reason, it was not acceptable in the past, it is still not.
Phil at 1:29PM on May 17th 2007
8. The fact that there is a perception that Islam is violent and fanatic is somewhat reinforced by the somewhat tepid public statements by so called moderate Muslims. Also, there have been numerous instances of moderate Muslims making inflamatory statements closely resembling the rants of so-called radicals. I think that there is a need for clear and unambiguous statements on a consistent basis form moderate Muslims rejecting the positions taken by the radicals.
eric at 1:25PM on May 17th 2007
9. That goes to you for you too, harvey, you ignorant fool.
Phil at 1:37PM on May 17th 2007
10. I have to say that when the "moderates" are apostates by the traditonal schools of Islamic jurisprudence, can we really call the radicals "radicals" or are they the traditionalists? Having spent time living in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Iraq, I have first hand experience. I have spent years studying Arabic since 2000 and read the Quran and exerpts of the Hadeeth in the original Arabic (a sobering read for anyone with delusions of political correctness). I truely wish the likes of Robert Spencer were wrong more often. It would let me sleep better at night. But we must deal with the world as it is and not as we wish it to be.
I live and work with many of the "moderates" and must inform you that they are not so much moderate as secularized. When a person starts to seem sane by the standards of the modern world only by abandoning the tenets of their religion and delving into apostacy (as defined by their own religious code), what does that say of the core religion?
It's all so easily dismissed, the extreme differences between Islam and the rest of the world would take volumes to explain, so we coccoon ourselves in ignorance and say, "they must be just like us deep down". But, if Boas' fundamental theory of Anthropology is correct, we must accept that some cultrues simply are NOT like us and we cannot project our expectations of what they must feel or think onto them.
Islam is a religion coming from a totally different paradigm and has lacked a "reformation". Rushdie is a novelist, not a Martin Luthor. There ARE reformers out there, but the punishment for their new view of Islam is, predictably... death. Traditionalist Islam brooks no competition, it seems.
A note on the "No compulsion in religion..." quote. Perhaps one of the all-time most quoted translations of a part of the Quran, but also pointless in the current debate. The theological/legal precedent of abrogation has officially rendered the line pointless. It is a Meccan verse from before the Hegira and was supplanted by later Medinan suras. To put it another way, it was a line from the Islamic "Old Testament" that was wiped out and replaced by new orders encapsulated in the Islamic "New Testament" such as the bloody and infamous "Sword Verse". The reformers who would see all the suras held in equal regard and the later violent ones symbolically reinterpreted are fighting every school of Islamic law, theology, and very real threats of death. They are out-numbered, out-gunned, out-maneuvered, out-brutalitied, and dismissed by the very populace who would benefit most from a reinterpretation of the faith. Sound depressing? Yes, but I must see the world as it is and not as I wish it to be.
Kevin Daiber at 10:13PM on May 17th 2007
11. @ harvey (comment 4)
You say, "Radical Christians are not killing people by the thousands."
But they used to harvey.. only every chance they got. There's a saying harvey, 'Tolerance begins where authority ends.'(write that down)
The abrahamic religions are notorious for their persistence in trying to extend their authority and their lack of tolerance.
Mumbling some 'apology' or excuse that, "We're not ALL blowing up abortion clinics." doesn't win you any prizes harvey, it just means that some of you are a little less bat-shit crazy than others.
pboyfloyd at 2:00PM on May 17th 2007
12. A very simple solution exists for this problem; just have the Catholic church provide "sanctuary" as they do in this country for the illegal invaders. Traitor Bush seems fine with that policy, and with a little luck, maybe the extremists will demonstrate the same depth of character (or lack of).
Jeff at 2:14PM on May 17th 2007
13. Intolerance is not just Muslim; it is also Christtian. PBS is featuring a series on the Inquisition. The Church subjected those disagreeing with traditional views to death by burning or being boiled in oil. At that time, as in Islam today, the domain of religion was thought to extended into every aspect of one's life.
JohnnyO at 2:21PM on May 17th 2007
14. Yes, Christians killed for God years and years ago, I agree.
However, my children don't have to live in the past. They have to live now. Today.
The threat, from radical Islam, unseen by many sleeping Americans, is now. In the moment.
Don't be so arrogant my fellow Americans. Societies come and they go. Don't be so sure that our country will go on no matter what.
End the ignorance, the hate Bush syndrome and wake up.
Ayasha
Ayasha at 2:28PM on May 17th 2007
15. Hey Jeff, did it ever occur to that the people in trouble here don't want to leave there homes and lives behind. Even better, what if you were told that everyone in your town had to convert or die. Would you want to leave everything you have ever known behind? Sanctuary doesn't seem like a very simple solution for these people now, does it?
Phil at 2:27PM on May 17th 2007