# Kunwar Khuldune Shahid: Don't blame the Taliban, **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 12, 2013, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667 "2013-03-12T00:09:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/1 "2013-03-12T00:09:09Z")
[Don’t blame the Taliban](http://my.telegraph.co.uk/kkshahid/kkshahid/12/dont-blame-the-taliban/) > [@](#): > > The Malala incident is déjà vu times million. You have religious ‘extremists’ manifesting brutality; the ‘educated’ class calls the act heinous, the ‘intellectuals’ label the offenders as beasts, the ‘liberals’ protest against the ‘cowardly act’ and while everyone is condemning the act, they remain shushed about the root cause of it all: the ideology. Throughout the past every single person who has denounced the Taliban has acted as an apologetic, justifying the religious ideology and claiming how those ‘uneducated morons’ have ‘unfortunately’ misinterpreted the teachings of peace and tranquility – no, they haven’t, ‘unfortunately’. [Don’t blame the Taliban II](http://my.telegraph.co.uk/kkshahid/kkshahid/15/dont-blame-the-taliban-ii/) > [@](#): > > The Taliban have defended the attack on Malala Yousafzai according to their scriptures and history. Of course if you’re looking for a command that orders the killing of every 14-year-old school going girl who is inspired by the leader of Dar-ul-Harb, you won’t find one, but what you will find are quite a few historical precedents. Like for instance the case of Asma bint Marwan, a poetess whose murder was sanctioned in 2 AH after she conspired against Islam and the Holy Prophet, as narrated by Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Sa’d. And then there are Ibn Khatal’s two slave girls Fartana and Qaribah, who used to sing songs against the Holy Prophet and were among the ten shortlisted to be executed at the Conquest of Makkah in 8 AH – one of them was killed, the second managed to escape (Ibn Sa’d, Tabaqat- Vol 2). Women were ordered to be killed for conspiring against the religion by their ideological predecessors, and so is it entirely the Taliban’s fault for taking cue and attempting to kill a girl who criticised their fundamentals; the fundamentals emanating from their ‘authentic’ religious scriptures? [Don’t blame the Taliban III](http://my.telegraph.co.uk/kkshahid/kkshahid/30/dont-blame-the-taliban-iii/) > [@](#): > > Quran, as ambiguous as it is in most other matters, quite unmistakably and repetitively asserts the need of violence to spread Allah’s message. However, the problem lies in the criteria for when violence is legitimate and when it isn’t, which seems to fluctuate haphazardly throughout the Quran. That particular problem is solved when one considers the time and the chronological order of the revealed Surahs, and Al-Nasikh Wal-Mansukh (The Doctrine of Abrogation). The Doctrine of Abrogation is an integral part of the study of Quran, and not at all “contentious” as the Generation Y apologists of Islam would have you believe. Claiming that the doctrine is debatable would mean directly questioning the four caliphs, the six Sahi Hadith compilers and pretty much every single Islamic scholar born before the 20th century AD. Hence, unless you are planning on slashing question marks over the teachings of the likes of Abu Bakr Siddiq, Umar Bin Khattab, Ali Bin Abi Talib, Muhammad ibn Ismail al-Bukhari, Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj, Ibn Jawzi, Ibn Kathir, Ibn Qayyim, etc, you really can’t question the doctrine. > > … > > Islam needs a massive revamp for it to become attuned with the present day, which should begin with not taking it literally as the word of a divine deity. One could then perceive the Sunnah as fitting for the political movement at the time, and mould the teachings to ensure their compatibility with the modern age. We would then have the ideology that the Muslim apologists propagate, which although is quite palatable and tranquil, it is still light years away from the original Islamic scriptures and their teachings. Till then, there is no point blaming the Taliban or other Muslim terrorist organizations for taking the Islamic teachings way too literally, because that is precisely how they were supposed to be taken, and were taken, by their ideological predecessors 1400 years ago. More articles: [http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/author/shahidkhuldune/](http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/author/shahidkhuldune/) ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/2 "2013-03-12T01:21:52Z")
What’s the debate? Does this blogger use too many scare quotes? What’s your opinion on the matter? ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 4:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/3 "2013-03-12T04:26:13Z")
> [@Dissonance](#): > > What’s the debate? What do Muslim societies need to do to stop terrorism? Do they need to openly admit that it is a bad idea to rigidly follow the rules of the Koran and the examples of the behavior of their prophet and his companions? > [@](#): > > Does this blogger use too many scare quotes? I think he is overusing them for effect to convey his level of exasperation at his society’s taboo against anything critical of Islamic dogma. > [@](#): > > What’s your opinion on the matter? His position seems credible from what I know, but that is limited. I was hoping to learn the thoughts of others. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/4 "2013-03-12T04:34:33Z")
The debate would be whether the religion is responsible for the Taliban’s actions based on the writings of: four caliphs, the six Sahi Hadith compilers and pretty much every single Islamic scholar born before the 20th century AD. Or the debate is the need to bring the religion into this century by interpreting the Prophet’s words and deeds in the context of when they were made and adjust accordingly. I think the OP needs to spell it out. ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 7:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/5 "2013-03-12T07:04:32Z")
There are plenty of Muslims who believe that the Koran is the word of a divine deity (as opposed to non divine deities, I guess) who don’t engage in religious violence. So the idea that ending such belief is necessary or sufficient to stop such violence is obviously false. Plus, if your plan to make peace with the Taliban is “get them to not believe in Allah anymore”, well, that’s pretty much as useful as not having a plan at all. Also, seriously, the scare quotes. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 10:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/6 "2013-03-12T10:23:32Z")
**Hank Beecher** , dumping quotes (particularly ambiguous quotes) is not a good way to initiate a debate. Unless you take a position and defend it, yourself, I will close this thread. [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/7 "2013-03-12T13:47:40Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > **Hank Beecher** , dumping quotes (particularly ambiguous quotes) is not a good way to initiate a debate. Unless you take a position and defend it, yourself, I will close this thread. > > [/Moderating] There is no good way to distill the issue into any more condensed of a form than the author has done in these three short articles. [QUOTE=Simplicio] There are plenty of Muslims who believe that the Koran is the word of a divine deity (as opposed to non divine deities, I guess) who don’t engage in religious violence. So the idea that ending such belief is necessary or sufficient to stop such violence is obviously false. [/QUOTE] Wrong. Some perpetrate the violence and others stand by and allow it to happen, as always. The mob who burned the hundred or so homes of the non-believers in Lahore the other day was a minority of Muslims, but are following the professed beliefs of a majority of their countrymen that apostates are to be punished. This is evidenced by the overwhelming support for the apostasy law, and the fact that the police stood by and watched the event happen, but arrested hundreds for peacefully protesting the incident. Most people who believed in white supremacy did not lynch black people, but the overwhelming belief in WS caused it to happen over and over none the less. ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/8 "2013-03-12T16:17:49Z")
Eh. The Unitarian Universalist Church in my neighborhood had its marriage-equality sign set on fire by religiously-motivated pinheads. I wrote a letter to the paper against that act, and someone on my condo board wrote a letter _supporting_ it, go figure. What did YOU do about it? Nothing. You “stood by and let it happen.” So I’m gonna need a _published_ apology from you before you proceed to say all Muslims tacitly allow terror. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/9 "2013-03-12T16:50:39Z")
> [@Hank\_Beecher](#): > > The mob who burned the hundred or so homes of the non-believers in Lahore the other day was a minority of Muslims, but are following the professed beliefs of a majority of their countrymen that apostates are to be punished. “Apostates” are not the same as “non-believers”. Also, how are you defining “non-believers” because that phrase doesn’t mean “non-Muslim”. That doesn’t mean I support laws against “apostates”(considering my username that would be quite odd) and I certainly think the term kaffir(unbeliever) is quite odious. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/10 "2013-03-12T22:30:42Z")
> [@Hank\_Beecher](#): > > There is no good way to distill the issue into any more condensed of a form than the author has done in these three short articles. Then it has no business being posted on this board which is based on conversational discussions, not Germanic monographs. This sort of ponderous approach to discussion with no clear thesis leads to page after page of acrimony with posters discovering well into the debate that they were not even arguing over the same points. Figure out a way to say what you want to debate in a couple of sentences or I will close the thread. [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/11 "2013-03-12T22:37:34Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > Eh. The Unitarian Universalist Church in my neighborhood had its marriage-equality sign set on fire by religiously-motivated pinheads. That is a fucked up thing for someone to do. I don’t think it is enough to simply say that the attackers distorted the true version of Christianity, considering the scriptural condemnations of homosexuality and the long history of using the bible to persecute gays. If they misinterpreted it they were at least following a long tradition of people making the same mistake. It is clear that the Christian ideas of hell and salvation often make it easy for people to justify doing horrible things to other people. Instead of accusing the attackers of misinterpreting some fanciful true and pure Christianity we have to question the very idea of following the scriptures to begin with. We must at least _be allowed to do so_ in order to evolve. > [@](#): > > I wrote a letter to the paper against that act, and someone on my condo board wrote a letter _supporting_ it, go figure. Cite? I’d like to read it. I know there are assholes like in the U.S. Maybe he would still be a dick without the bible, but maybe in some warped way he thinks he is helping to save people. In either case reading stories about Zombie Jesus obviously isn’t helping the situation. Maybe it’s not a good idea to base one’s outlook on life and liberty on the literal reading of an archaic fantasy novel. There are a lot of people who agree with me in this general notion, and we tend to be pretty vocal, without a whole lot of backlash except for immediate family and community if you come from a bible thumping area. Bigotry and religious fundamentalism is mocked in our culture, continuously, and rightfully so. The guy that burnt the sign and the guy that defended him are the outcasts. This is VERY important in my opinion. If we had a culture where it was impermissible to publicly criticize and condemn the scriptures that inspired them, there might very well have been a mob committing murder instead of a few pinheads’ hateful vandalism. We have sure had our share of lynch mobs in the past. > [@](#): > > What did YOU do about it? Condemned it as soon as I heard about it. > [@](#): > > Nothing. You “stood by and let it happen.” So I’m gonna need a _published_ apology from you before you proceed to say all Muslims tacitly allow terror. All Muslims certainly don’t, many stand up against the fundamentalists, and we should stand with them because they need the help. Here is what I take to be the Muslim rough equivalent of your tolerant Universalist Christian neighbors. [http://mpvusa.org/progressive-islam/](http://mpvusa.org/progressive-islam/) This group is very limited in size, and is generally marginalized from the body of Muslims as a whole, from what I gather. The Universalist church in my town is one of the most popular and is a center of the community. ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/12 "2013-03-12T22:39:01Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Then it has no business being posted on this board which is based on conversational discussions, not Germanic monographs. > > This sort of ponderous approach to discussion with no clear thesis leads to page after page of acrimony with posters discovering well into the debate that they were not even arguing over the same points. Figure out a way to say what you want to debate in a couple of sentences or I will close the thread. > > [/Moderating] Post #3. You are being highly unreasonable. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/13 "2013-03-12T22:42:26Z")
> [@Hank\_Beecher](#): > > Post #3. You are being highly unreasonable. I was responding to your claim that the discussion could only be based on your quotes, making Post #3 look like an aside. I have no problem with this thread being based on Post #3. ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/14 "2013-03-12T22:43:27Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > “Apostates” are not the same as “non-believers”. > > Also, how are you defining “non-believers” because that phrase doesn’t mean “non-Muslim”. > > That doesn’t mean I support laws against “apostates”(considering my username that would be quite odd) and I certainly think the term kaffir(unbeliever) is quite odious. From what I understand[this particular incident](http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&q=badami+bagh&oq=badami+bagh&gs_l=news-cc.12..43j43i53.2048.2048.0.3010.1.1.0.0.0.0.65.65.1.1.0...0.0...1ac.2.a02jJN5gjaE) started over accusations of apostasy and then matured to general unbeliever house burning once the mob arrived. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/15 "2013-03-12T23:09:41Z")
> [@Hank\_Beecher](#): > > From what I understand[this particular incident](http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&q=badami+bagh&oq=badami+bagh&gs_l=news-cc.12..43j43i53.2048.2048.0.3010.1.1.0.0.0.0.65.65.1.1.0...0.0...1ac.2.a02jJN5gjaE) started over accusations of apostasy and then matured to general unbeliever house burning once the mob arrived. Using a google search as your cite is not terribly helpful. Beyond that, you continue hurling around the term “unbeliever” and “apostate” as if they mean the same thing. They don’t. Moreover, what makes you classify the people murdered in the incident that so far the only thing you provide as a link is a google search as “unbelievers”? I have a hard time believing they were. Can you provide more compelling evidence for your claim. > [@](#): > > All Muslims certainly don’t, many stand up against the fundamentalists, and we should stand with them because they need the help. I’m not sure you understand what Muslim fundamentalists are. Do you? To be fair, it’s fairly common for westerners to not understand and to look at it from the perspective of someone more familiar with Christianity than Islam. To give an obvious example, neither Al Quaeda, the Taliban, nor the rulers of Iran are Islamic fundamentalists. In fact they’re the very opposite of it and Muslim fundamentalists don’t like them. ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2013, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/16 "2013-03-12T23:57:07Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Using a google search as your cite is not terribly helpful. > > Beyond that, you continue hurling around the term “unbeliever” and “apostate” as if they mean the same thing. > > They don’t. > > Moreover, what makes you classify the people murdered in the incident that so far the only thing you provide as a link is a google search as “unbelievers”? > > I have a hard time believing they were. > > Can you provide more compelling evidence for your claim. No one was murdered in the recent incident, a neighborhood of houses was burned down by a mob. [Pakistan arrests scores over Lahore anti-Christian riot - BBC News](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21732448) The articles in post #1 are about [Malala Yousafzai](http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=malala%20yousafzai&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CD0QFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FMalala_Yousafzai&ei=rL4_UYnwLoS89gTtt4HQCg&usg=AFQjCNGd4BPdf8eseYVIpckz56FCRyUopg) who was shot in the face for doing what we are all doing now. > [@](#): > > I’m not sure you understand what Muslim fundamentalists are. > > Do you? To be fair, it’s fairly common for westerners to not understand and to look at it from the perspective of someone more familiar with Christianity than Islam. I am trying to figure it out. My working definition is one that as you predict I base on my familiarity with Christians. A fundamentalist is someone that follows their rules simply because they are the rules, whether they be commandments directly from above and recorded for posterity at the time, or through word of mouth, or based on the purported behavior of one of the prophets. A non fundamentalist has come to the conclusion that much of his tradition has been abrogated by modernity, and that the only parts of it that should be propagated and practiced are those that survive critical scrutiny in a modern context. > [@](#): > > To give an obvious example, neither Al Quaeda, the Taliban, nor the rulers of Iran are Islamic fundamentalists. In fact they’re the very opposite of it and Muslim fundamentalists don’t like them. I understand that many other people are more adherent practitioners than these groups, and of course there are motivations other than religion, but the Taliban at least profess to live according to a strict interpretation of the Koran and Sunnah. Isn’t this correct? If someone literally believes that they are following the commandment of God to kill, I would consider them a fundamentalist. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2013, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/17 "2013-03-13T00:21:49Z")
> [@Hank\_Beecher](#): > > No one was murdered in the recent incident, a neighborhood of houses was burned down by a mob. [Pakistan arrests scores over Lahore anti-Christian riot - BBC News](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21732448) The articles in post #1 are about [ According to the link, the people attacked weren’t “unbelievers” but Christians. Muslim fundamentalists don’t think of Christians or even Jews as “unbelievers.” The word “unbeliever” only applies to those who deny the existence of the God of Abraham. That’s why Jews and Christians were seen as fellow “people of the book” and always accorded a legal rank and protection in Muslim societies. > [@](#): > > I understand that many other people are more adherent practitioners than these groups, and of course there are motivations other than religion, but the Taliban at least profess to live according to a strict interpretation of the Koran and Sunnah. Isn’t this correct? Virtually all Muslims believe in following a “strict interpretation of the Quran and Sunnah”, however there really is no way to have a “strict interpretation” since the Quran is up to a large number of interpretations and the Sunnah is determined by the various recognized hadiths(or ahadith if one wants to be pedantic) and not only are the various hadiths(stories and sayings attributed to the prophet or his companions) highly debatable and often quite contradictory, there’s debate on which are “authentic” and which ones “aren’t”. Al-Quaeda, the Taliban and the Iranian regime especially aren’t fundamentalist but radicals and have always been seen as such in Muslim societies as opposed to fundamentalists who, for obvious reasons are conservatives. For anyone really interested in this, I’d recommend _Emmanuel Sivan’s Radical Islam: Medieval Theology and Modern Politics_. [URL=“[Amazon.com](http://www.amazon.com/Radical-Islam-Medieval-Theology-Politics/dp/0300049153/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1363134000&sr=8-1&keywords=Sivan+radical+Islam)”][Amazon.com](http://www.amazon.com/Radical-Islam-Medieval-Theology-Politics/dp/0300049153/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1363134000&sr=8-1&keywords=Sivan+radical+Islam)]([Redirect Notice](http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=malala%20yousafzai&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&sqi=2&ved=0CD0QFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FMalala_Yousafzai&ei=rL4_UYnwLoS89gTtt4HQCg&usg=AFQjCNGd4BPdf8eseYVIpckz56FCRyUopg)) ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2013, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/18 "2013-03-13T00:23:36Z")
> [@Hank\_Beecher](#): > > From what I understand[this particular incident](http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gl=us&tbm=nws&q=badami+bagh&oq=badami+bagh&gs_l=news-cc.12..43j43i53.2048.2048.0.3010.1.1.0.0.0.0.65.65.1.1.0...0.0...1ac.2.a02jJN5gjaE) started over accusations of apostasy and then matured to general unbeliever house burning once the mob arrived. Correction, accusations of blasphemy not apostasy. So if I understand correctly one is a blasphemer if you say Mohamed was not a prophet, for example, and an apostate if you say or believe this after having been a Muslim. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2013, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/19 "2013-03-13T01:41:12Z")
Heck, the punishment for apostasy should be delivered on the _parents_, since they obviously didn’t do a good enough job at indoctrination. ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2013, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667/20 "2013-03-13T01:52:14Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > According to the link, the people attacked weren’t “unbelievers” but Christians. > > Muslim fundamentalists don’t think of Christians or even Jews as “unbelievers.” > > The word “unbeliever” only applies to those who deny the existence of the God of Abraham. > > That’s why Jews and Christians were seen as fellow “people of the book” and always accorded a legal rank and protection in Muslim societies. I realize that there is a separate distinction made for people of the other Abrahamic faiths, but I did not know that unbeliever is not applicable to those that reject Mo as prophet. I was using unbeliever in the sense of not Muslim or not real Muslim in the way [Sunni accuse Shia of not being Muslim](http://dawn.com/2012/08/15/who-gets-to-be-a-muslim-in-pakistan/). > [@](#): > > Virtually all Muslims believe in following a “strict interpretation of the Quran and Sunnah”, however there really is no way to have a “strict interpretation” since the Quran is up to a large number of interpretations and the Sunnah is determined by the various recognized hadiths(or ahadith if one wants to be pedantic) and not only are the various hadiths(stories and sayings attributed to the prophet or his companions) highly debatable and often quite contradictory, there’s debate on which are “authentic” and which ones “aren’t”. Right but there is more debate about some than others, a history of interpretation, and[the way they are being interpreted today](http://www.pewglobal.org/2010/07/29/chapter-4-religion-law-and-society/). The chart on the bottom of that page indicates that 82% of Pakistanis favor stoning adulterers, 82% support whippings and cutting off of hands for theft and robbery, and 76% are in favor of the death penalty for those that leave the Muslim religion. I think those numbers are similar for Saudi Arabia and Egypt. The argument is that if so much is up to interpretation, and so many of the interpretations are so horrendous, maybe that is a clue NOT to follow the Koran and Sunnah, at least until scholars have worked out whether or not it is OK to shoot children in the face for blogging about school. > [@](#): > > For anyone really interested in this, I’d recommend _Emmanuel Sivan’s Radical Islam: Medieval Theology and Modern Politics_ Thanks [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kunwar-khuldune-shahid-dont-blame-the-taliban/652667.md?page=2)