News

Killing apostates is not an infringement of human rights

Killing apostates is not an infringement of human rights

Back in 2013, the Malaysian Islamic Development Department (Jakim) insisted that complaints of human rights abuses against Malaysia were not genuine. Instead they were part of an evil plan to undermine Islam by imposing a lesbian, bisexual, gay and transgender (LBGT) agenda on the country.

A leading figure in Jakim is a pipsqueak called Mohd Aizam Mas’od, above, who has since written a paper in which he argues that killing people for apostasy is the right thing to do if Islam is to be protected.

Islamic ruling has defined that to leave the religion or to become an apostate is a grave crime and the person has to be tried and punished … This is about the sacredness of the religious doctrine.

And “sacred doctrine”, according to Mas’od trumps human rights at every turn.

Human rights are never sacred, only men have claimed that they are. As for religion, it is a revelation that is delivered by the Almighty to mankind as a guide. Most religions acknowledge this. Even though the religion is not held in high esteem or sacred by men, the essence of religion itself is sacred.

Hence, it is the rights of all Muslims to protect the sacredness of their religion. The crimes of its followers will tarnish the purity of Islam. Apostasy is among the gravest crimes according to Islam. As such, apostasy is not a right, it is forbidden by Islam. Hence, any apostate who refuses to repent must be punished.

He goes on to explain punishments for acts of apostasy are reserved for those who speak out about their tyrannical religion.
Apostates who “keep quiet” and do not reveal their actions to the public won’t be punished because:

The general method practised by the Islamic rulers is to take actions only on what can be seen, whilst matters of
the spirit should be left to Allah.

However, if a person openly declares his or her apostasy, or plants seeds of doubts in the hearts of the other Muslims, immediate steps must be taken to change the apostate’s mind. If this fails, the death penalty needs to be imposed.

It cannot be denied that the public act of apostasy is an act that wages war against Allah and His Messenger.

20 responses to “Killing apostates is not an infringement of human rights”

  1. Gerald says:

    Nasty little cowardly shit. I hope someone accuses him of insulting the prophet and a screaming shrieking howling whipped up spittle flecked lynch mob strings him up by his scrotum a torches his scrawny arse. And I would piss in the gutter rather than waste my piss dousing the flames.There, that’s my response.

  2. L.Long says:

    Little pipsqueak making little mousy noises. And human rights are not sacred but then neither is your phucking gawd or your phucking religion.
    You are able to do what is done because you have a totalitarian gov’mint backing you up!! Otherwise some one would cut your …….well you would be most likely ignored for the impotent dimwit you are.

  3. Broga says:

    Smug, self righteous and arrogant little git.

  4. AgentCormac says:

    ‘This is about the sacredness of the religious doctrine.’
    No, you vile excuse for a human being. It’s about making sure that despite the fact that you are worthless and ineffectual individual you can still somehow exercise power over others. And the more extreme your ‘proclamations’, the more you no doubt somehow feel important. Try getting an education. Try putting yourself in the shoes of those you condemn. Try actually thinking for yourself. What a horrible, revolting species we humans have turned out to be.

  5. 1859 says:

    Notice all the ‘Hences’, the ‘as such, the ‘even thoughss’ that try to give this bigoted claptrap a semblance of rational argument. Appalling that such a young man can have his head already so far up his own arse he can’t see day from night.
    I wonder how he defines ‘killing’ – ‘transferring someone into a state of non-vitality’?

  6. RussellW says:

    This atheist infidel Kuffar can’t help asking the obvious question —“why does this perfect religion revealed by the perfect man need protection from apostasy?”

    The verminous weasel is really admitting that Islam is essentially a weak ideology. There’s more than the usual religious lunacy involved in this attitude, Islam is also a useful ideology to enforce Malay racial supremacism over the other ethnic groups in Malaysia, the Chinese and Indians who follow other religious traditions.

  7. Broga says:

    What damns this creep’s religion is that a slime ball like him speaks as its representative. I don’t know what a sadist looks like but this dope looks like I imagine a cold, pitiless sadist would look like.

    Put him in a situation where he is confronted one to one with a challenging man and he would run like a terrified rabbit.

  8. Rob Andrews says:

    People like that would do well to remember that the door swings both ways. Radial groups with as strong feelings but with other belief systems may come to power to accuse him of something like heracy.

    Unleash the dogs of war; such happened to Robespierre during the French revolution. Or what going on with ISIL. Soon they’ll turn on each other.

    “From one end of the country to another, this land is planted thick with laws, if they should fail who could stand in the foul winds that will blow”.
    Sir Thomas More

  9. Michael Glass says:

    Forget about the man’s physique. It doesn’t matter if he’s built like Adonis or the proverbial 40 kilo weakling, it’s his ideas that are disturbing.

    Note that he raises the ruling about apostasy to a religious doctrine that trumps all questions of human rights. He’s not concerned if a person quietly walks away from Islam – as many do. However, if that person plants seeds of doubt in the minds of Muslims, immediate steps must be taken to change that apostate’s mind. If this fails, the death penalty needs to be imposed.

    As I said, forget about the physique, it’s the ideas that are dangerous and that need to be opposed.

  10. 1859 says:

    @ Rob Andrews: One of my favourite Thomas Moore quotes, which is quite apposite here is – ‘The tyrant he doeth like the ape, that the higher he climbs, the more he doth show his arse.’

  11. John C says:

    We really need to reinstate assassination as a tool of social engineering.Muslims already have.

  12. Robster says:

    The favoured fairy of the Muslims is as hopeless as the version chosen by the Jesus followers. It can’t even look after itself (or do anything actually detectable)! And it (apparently) wants regular prayers and worship too.

  13. Vanity Unfair says:

    “[A]n evil plan to undermine Islam by imposing a lesbian, bisexual, gay and transgender (LBGT) agenda on the country.”
    Those who shout the loudest need reminding that these alternatives can be tolerated, accepted, ignored as civilization progresses. They are not compulsory.
    If your god needs legal protection it is not worth worshipping.
    If you think about it, isn’t even hinting that Allah is not powerful enough to protect him/her/it/theirself demeaning the godhead and undermining Islam?

  14. sailor1031 says:

    How can we ever have rapprochement with barbarians such as this whose emotions (you can’t call it thought) are mired in 7th century arabia? It is simply not possible.

  15. Stonyground says:

    “This atheist infidel Kuffar can’t help asking the obvious question —“why does this perfect religion revealed by the perfect man need protection from apostasy?””

    That was my thought too. If something is true there is little reason to doubt. If, on the other hand, Mo was a lying charlatan and Islam is a big pack of lies, only then does doubt become a problem.

  16. barriejohn says:

    Human rights are never sacred, only men have claimed that they are. As for religion, it is a revelation that is delivered by the Almighty to mankind as a guide. Most religions acknowledge this. Even though the religion is not held in high esteem or sacred by men, the essence of religion itself is sacred.

    Yes, it’s not just Islam; the religious do not agree with “human rights” for precisely the reasons that he states. This is exactly the thing that I heard over and over again when I was a Christian: morality comes from God and is impossible without belief; God’s Law comes first, whatever “man” says, and “compromise” is impossible; God – and hence his followers – knows what is best for us; individual freedom is the path to destruction, and will result in the collapse of civilization; and so on. In the light of all this, personal liberty is impossible, and individual suffering is to be welcomed if it leads to the “purification” of the community or society as a whole, and the protection of “divine laws”. These are dangerous ideas – but seductive to the deluded or simple-minded.

  17. Dave says:

    Islamic Development?? Now there’s an oxymoron.

  18. andym says:

    Barrie. Precisely why these people should be kept as far away as possible from political power. There is no reasoning with deluded weasels like this. It brings home that we’re relatively lucky in the west, without any need for complacency.

    People. I wouldn’t go overboard in your lovefest for Thomas More. Hitchens called him “a persecutor for all seasons.” He was , ultimately, just another religious bigot who tortured people for daring to own a copy of the Bible.

  19. Edwin Salter says:

    What absurd remarks about Mohammed’s appearance – so youthful,carefully groomed and therefore (gasp) desirable. Might it be correct that he be stoned asap to prevent impure thoughts? Let’s ask him for an expert opinion.