Me vs. Islam: Why Nobody Should Ever Convert to Islam?

Note: Please keep in mind that this post applies to Shia Islam, though I believe many aspects of it applies to Sunnis as well.

To me it is quite obvious that no one should convert to any religion, and I think in my previous posts I have established that fact. But the question about Islam was presented to me by my housemate, who asked in particular why should no one convert to Islam, if he or she is a member of other religions.

I told him I had many very good reason, but one I think to be the most important, and that reason was losing one’s individuality. If Renaissance did one thing for Europe, that was creating a sense of self centred importance in people, the ability to think as one, and not as only a member of an ideology. This by itself led to enlightenment and rationalism. But Islam has never had a Renaissance, and that’s why if anyone converts to it, they must lose their entire individual existence.

To back my claim up I don’t need to go far, “Islam” as a world means “surrender”. Surrender to the will of their tyrant God, Allah, who has the desire to control “everything” in one’s life. Most Abrahamic religions are in fact totalitarian in the same way, but none are like Islam.

Most people from outside may or may not know, but the Sharia law is not all in the Koran or in Hadith, it is made up by mullahs in their books which is called “resalah”. Reading one of them makes you realized what actually means to control every aspect of one’s life by controlling their will.

They literally try to control “everything”. Let’s have an example about eating habits: What you eat, when you eat, how you eat, where to eat, where not to eat, what is better to do when you eat, what’s better not to do when you eat, etc, etc… From the most basic, to the most trivial things like “it is better not to drink with left hand” they want to control!

This goes for every aspect of one’s life: There are orders even from “How to enter the bathroom” to “How to relieve yourself in the bathroom” and what to do next, and no, I’m not kidding at all.

And then there is the matter of “Fatwa”. The attempt to silence any sane person who criticizes Islam in a way that the Mullahs don’t like. Example? Ayatollah Sistani’s fatwa on Abdulaziz Sachedina, telling other Muslims “Don’t listen to him”.

And yes, there are orders (fatwa) about whom should be killed too. Ayatollah Khomeini’s Fatwa on Sir Salman Rushdie is probably the most famous and the most persistent one of them. You may also remember the more recent murder of Theo van Gogh, the director of a short movie criticizing the bigotry of Islam (I don’t know if this one was a fatwa).

No sane person in the world should ever commit to this horrific mind control of a totalitarian ideology. And remember, even after this, if one still wants to convert to Islam, one should have in mind that there is no escape from this: The punishment for apostasy in Islam is death, and even if the converter realizes that he/she has made a mistake, there is most probably no way back.

Advertisements

Published by

thetruthfulheretic

Dear fellow Homo sapiens, or if you prefer conscious mammals! And of course, friends nonetheless: I created my blog in order to speak my very weird mind, mostly about three subjects (as I identify myself and my state of mind with them): Atheism, as I was born in the Middle East and saw and felt the affects of Islam; Homosexuality and equal rights, as a gay man who has tasted the Homophobia and also Sexism in that society; and Liberalism and political philosophy, which I think is a good ground for secular values and criticism of fundamentalism. If you wish, visit and join your state of mind to mine. I hope they don't short circuit!

25 thoughts on “Me vs. Islam: Why Nobody Should Ever Convert to Islam?”

  1. I think you have read Shiite book, or Islam based on Shiite which is condemn by 80% of Muslim (Sunni). When you said Mullah and Ayatollah. It become more sure that you read their books. Their teaching is out from Islam and most of scholar are give a fatwa that they not approved their faith.

    There was a law about apostasy, yes there have a death penalty. When we study a law, there was a lot of circumstance that need to be fulfil. It was unreasonable to give a death penalty to apostasy just because of apostasy. When it goes to law scope, it should be read as law perspective, not as religious perspective.

    1. Yes I have read Shia Islamic books, and no, I don’t care if they are condemned by Sunnis or not, since the exact position of Shia mullahs is the same as Sunnis: They are the wrong Islam and we are the right one.

      That being said, I will put in the beginning of the post that this post applies to Shia Islam, though I believe many aspects of it applies to Sunnis as well. (thank you for pointing that out)

      There “was” a law about apostasy, or there “is” one? (This applies to both Shia and Sunni, they both have death penalties for the ones that have left this religion)

      Again, I do not care about “perspective”, I care about fairness. This is the worst kind of nightmerish unjust “law” that one can make, no matter how you want to justify this act (though I would like to hear it). This makes Islam the biggest mafia gang of the world: You can check “in” any time you like but you can never leave!

      1. Dear Thetruthfulheretic,

        I miss out this question. I do not know how Shiite derive this issue, but Sunni derive sound like this.

        There have apostasy act of death penalty. Yes. I will not lie on that, it was in Quran.
        How to use it:

        A section of the People of the Book say: believe in the morning what is revealed to the believers, but reject it at the end of the day; perchance they may (themselves) turn back.] (Aal `Imran 3:72)

        In our history, there was a lot of apostasy (more than 100 case happen), but our prophet pbuh never killed single one of them if not with other reason.

        “With killing & spreading rebellious agenda”
        On the day of the conquest (fath) of Makkah, the Prophet (pbuh) ordered that Maqis ibn Subabah be killed, as he had not only apostatized from Islam but also insulted and “killed” a Muslim person. He (pbuh) also ordered that Ibn Abi Sarh be killed, as he had apostatized from Islam and also sought to spread falsehood and slander.

        “In battle”
        `Abdur-Raziq, Al-Baihaqi, and Ibn Hazm reported that Anas returned from a mission for jihad and went to `Umar, who asked him, “What has been done with the six people from (the tribe) of Bakr ibn Wa’il who have apostatized from Islam?” Anas said, “O Commander of the Believers, they are people who turned apostate and joined the polytheists, and thus they were killed in the battle.” `Umar commented, “We belong to Allah and to Him we will return.”
        Anas wondered, “Had their penalty been but death?” `Umar replied, “Yes. I would have asked them to return to Islam, and had they refused, I would have imprisoned them.”
        This attitude of `Umar was also held by Ibrahim An-Nakh`I, and Ath-Thawri, who said, “This is the viewpoint that we follow.” Ath-Thawri also said, “The punishment of the apostate is to be deferred so long as there is a hope that he may return to Islam.”

        “In rebellion”
        Caliph Umar during his reign encounter 1000 apostasy who rebel during his time. That time the rebellion equipped sword, war equipment and etc to start a war.
        So what to do, stay silent, waiting to be killed?

        Conclusion:
        Apostasy Act will only take place if there was any harm to Muslim country such as killing, battle and rebellion. If apostasy come out from our religion peacefully, we should not do any harm to them but ask them to repent. Even in battle, Umar said we should imprison them only not to kill them.
        In easy word, it was Act of Treason not apostasy.

  2. Sharia is always there is Quran and Hadith.

    A scholar extracted from Quran and hadith to be a Sharia. It was called Fiqh (Jurisprudent). It included from brushing teeth, cleansing, relationship, marriage, wills, politics and also Criminal Law. The famous “Sharia” in West are in term of Criminal Law. So 99% of Sharia is deleted in Western dictionary to covered up with Criminal Law, which also wrongly presented.
    If you referring to Shiite book, then you will found Mutaah (legalize prostitution) and others wrong method of living in society and etc. Not just Western, we also cant accept.

    1. And you think that’s a good thing?! To make laws for brushing one’s teeth?!

      And again, Shia does not call Mutaah prostitution, for them it’s a type of marriage. And they think they have good reason for that too.

    2. Thanks for asking,

      Brushing a teeth or how to eat is under Sharia. Yes it is. It rules how to live or we called it manners.
      Sharia is Law, but not all is gazette in constitution. In book of Fiqh, the separate this thing, manner, criminal, laws, marriage and etc. Western pull out all these and called it Law. So there was misunderstanding in meaning of Sharia itself.

      Brushing teeth or how to eat, wearing perfume, good clothes, or where to eat is not under “Law” as what Western thinking. It is “guidance of manner” which also called under “jurisprudence” of Islam or Sharia. If you dont want to brush teeth or wearing perfume or wearing good clothes is OK. But we have a guidance, so it can differentiate between a manner person and and bad person.

      A good reason for Mutaah?
      I dont know what are reason between marriage for half an hour or one day (certain Shiite do that -and approved by their leader). Some also do for half years and etc. So in my understanding that is equivalent to prostitution but legalize it.

  3. As far as I’m concerned, any religion that can’t take a joke (turban-bomb Muhammad), demands its adherents grovel on their knees five times daily, and prohibits the consumption of alcohol can seriously FUCK OFF.

  4. Dear Phisomelane,

    You tell me, who cant take a stupid joke condemn a person creed, race or religion?
    If I today tell you, atheist is non-moral, non ethic, people with no rules and barbaric. Can you accept it? Can you take my joke? Ask yourself before asking others.

    Or you called China man Yellow Monkey, or African man nigger/negro or Japanese Suicide Plane. You think they can accept your jokes? It is not a simple matter, it was a matter of honor and dignity of certain tribe, religion, belief and respect.

    Prohibit the consumption of alcohol?
    Can you tell me what are the benefit of consuming of alcohol in public as per your statement. Are you saying alcohol is good? In what way? Medical (May be you will say yes, as anesthetic, my question is drinking in public)? Health? Relationship? Criminal? Manners?

  5. “You tell me, who cant take a stupid joke condemn a person creed, race or religion?”

    Who can’t take a joke? All the muslims who rioted because someone drew a cartoon of their beloved prophet. As well as Mohammed Bouyeri. Add Ruhollah Khomeini to the long list.

    “If I today tell you, atheist is non-moral, non ethic, people with no rules and barbaric. Can you accept it? Can you take my joke? Ask yourself before asking others.”

    Of course I can “accept it”: you’re just some name on a screen — your opinions mean next to nothing to me.

    “Or you called China man Yellow Monkey, or African man nigger/negro or Japanese Suicide Plane. You think they can accept your jokes? It is not a simple matter, it was a matter of honor and dignity of certain tribe, religion, belief and respect.”

    I don’t make “racist” jokes. But religious mockery? HELL YES, count me in, Koran Kreep!

    “Prohibit the consumption of alcohol?
Can you tell me what are the benefit of consuming of alcohol in public as per your statement.”

    I said nothing about the public consumption of alcohol.

    “Are you saying alcohol is good? In what way?”

    Speaking only for myself, liquor gives me an initial surge of restlessness that I can use to motivate me to catch up on any number of mundane household tasks I’ve fallen behind on. Booze also aids in making religious zealots slightly more humorous…

  6. Dear Phisomine,

    May be you can accept the mockery, but you speak for own self not others and your sentence speak it loud how you behave outside the computer.

    In term of alcohol, you should write to Medical Journal, may be they will accept it. Today you are young, you can said it loud and proud. Tell me again in future (may be another 30 years), if you still can speak like that.

    Thank you.

  7. As a gay man, I had to face to many hateful comments, but that does not make me go and “kill” someone because of my “tribe”. This is quite moronic. If possible, I will “reason”, if not, and the opponents have abandoned reason for madness entirely, then I would not say anything. Instead, I will write a blog post about it, go to media about it, give a public speech about it. After all, it is the freedom of speech.

    Burning and pillaging and killing and destroying is the work of those who are “not” in the right, and they know it, but they are so childish that they cannot accept it.

    //

    Also watch:

  8. Oh, and as for Alcohol, I don’t drink it and I don’t like it, but I recognize that people have a choice, and as long as their choice is not a threat to other individuals, they are free to do pursue their own happiness.

    1. I agree with you. Christian who want to drink then drink it. In Islamic nation, we dont allow people drink in public. If people (non-Muslim) want to drink, drink it at home but not in public.
      There was a hadith:
      In the time of Umar bin al-Khattab, he was walking in the streets of Madinah with Abdurrahman bin Awf and they passed by a house where the people were busy drinking alcohol and partying. Abdurrahman turned to Umar and said. “What shall we do?” At this ‘Umar (who was the Khalifah) turned to him and said; “we should repent to Allah, as we should not be spying on the people.” We are told “do not spy on people.”

      The problem happen when people drink it in public and others thing come to action (mafia, prostitution and etc).
      If there was, in country where Muslim exceed 90% then it was ban, so why need to approved a law that is bring more bad than good thing? If want to approved, it what basis?

  9. “May be you can accept the mockery, but you speak for own self not others and your sentence speak it loud how you behave outside the computer.”

    Of course I speak only for myself — who else could I possibly speak for? I have no need to speak for anyone else but myself — what’s your point? You have no idea how I “behave outside the computer,” so again — what’s your point?

    “In term of alcohol, you should write to Medical Journal, may be they will accept it.”

    It seems English is not your first language, but yet AGAIN — what is your point??? You asked what liquor is good for, and I gave you just one example of its personal benefit -to ME-. I don’t claim alcohol is beneficial to all, and I certainly don’t say it’s negative to all either.

    “Today you are young, you can said it loud and proud. Tell me again in future (may be another 30 years), if you still can speak like that.”

    You are making baseless assumptions: I am not “young” by most standards — I’m 45 years old, and see my doctor about three times a year for routine check-ups and tests, and he’s never once asked me about my alcohol consumption, so I imagine I’m in the clear for the foreseeable future…

    1. The point is you have a make a joke to 1.6 billion people and it was 25% of population and it was a stupid joke. If I mock you it just a personal mockery. If you have a wisdom, then think for yourself.

      That the different.

  10. “The point is you have a make a joke to 1.6 billion people and it was 25% of population and it was a stupid joke. If I mock you it just a personal mockery. If you have a wisdom, then think for yourself.”

    Oh that’s RICH — a muslim, or any other religionist advising someone to “think for themselves.” You see, that’s at the heart what “freedom of speech” entails: the liberty to mock or insult someone without fear of a “fatwah” being proclaimed against them. In my opinion, islam is a slave’s religion — a religion whose very name means “submission.” And NO — I’m NOT concerned that this might upset your, or anyone else’s delicate sensibilities; be it just you floundering around on the internet, or 1.6 billion other religionists cowering on their knees in submission to their deity.

  11. There are other countries of the world (secular nonetheless) that do not allow drinking in public, Australia and Canada are two good examples. And also not everybody drinks until they are drunk. And no, neither mafia, nor prostitution can be assotiated with drinking. In fact mafia comes in when you make it illegal, not when it is legal!

    I think you’re not realizing it, but you proving the points made on this page. Your defence of these so called laws is rationally flawed, especially the ones about this barbaric behaviour and open bullying against freedom of speech.

    1. Another popular name to Islam is “Religion of Reasoning” and “Religion of Science” during 600AD to 1800AD. A religion that compromise every thing from head to toe and every point have a reason. Even the root is coming from Christian & Jews, we reject because they twist the verse up side down.

      To gain and sustain 1.6b people is not easy job. If it only just depend on mystic or myth, you think can we sustain that amount of followers. Today it become a fastest growing religion in world again with it reason and science. We are not Christian, if you want to compare at first place.

      1. Really?! What stopped you, you could have easily said 2000! Islam “was” to very little extent reasonable until almost 1000 AD, that Abou al Hasan Ashari and his followers closed all the doors toward rationality and logic. Before that, there was an infant of thought in the world of Islam which could maybe lead to a Renaissance, but it didn’t happen.

        Islam has nothing to do with science, and as pointed out it left what little reasonability it had behind long time ago.

        And I agree, it was not easy at all: Winning all those wars until Charles the hammer Martel, stopped them.

      2. At least we have 18~19 century to be proud of. While atheist do have. Let me guess.. None?
        If I include communism and Nazism, well you can said it about 1~2 century, if you are agree with both ideology.
        Secularism? Still in development/testing process and the ideology cant be accepted by all people.
        Yes, you are right again, Islam (Quran) not a book of science, it just help his follower to start read, search, debate, compare, write. So from there, science develop.

      3. No dear, you see: The subject was not about atheism or secularism, it was about Islam. (Where I come from, they call this fallacy “you too”, which does not even stick here since Communism and Nazism were much closer to religions*, and not “Atheism”.)

        And no, you cannot be proud of it, since most of it is crap, as I pointed out. And where on earth did you find 19 centuries?! it has only been 1400 years man! Even less than that!

        And if science was to develop from only those things, the ancient Greeks should have been the best scientists of the world.

        //

        * Communism and Nazism have something in common with most religions: They are monolithic ideologies, they believe they have the only real truth, and all who don’t agree should pay dearly (mostly by their lives).

        //

        This is the end of our debate about history.

  12. It’s somewhat telling that every post on at least the three most recent pages of Hifzan Shafiee’s blog are about his religion (islam), and from a religious viewpoint. As a result, it’s hardly surprising every post of his in this thread is thru the distorted, stifled perspective of someone laboring under the burden of religious indoctrination.

    Of course, that’s not to imply there are no extremely intelligent, open minded religious people in the world. Hifzan Shafiee certainly seems intelligent: an engineer and doctor, according to his “About” page. Nevertheless, this demonstrates all-too-clearly the negative, limiting, corrosive effects religion can have on any individual, in most any society.

    1. Thanks Psilomelane, I take as complement even I know its not.
      I am engineer by profession, doctor is not my profession, it was my wife profession and it was a part of religion to have a good occupation.

      All my post is based on Islamic teaching taking from authentic books and a teaching of our top scholar. If you think our scholar same as Christian scholar, I think you have make a big mistake. Our scholar is very open minded especially top scholar and our prophet pbuh.

      I assume have not read any book from our top scholar.

      You just window shopping the Islamic teaching, not go through the real teaching. We Muslim put the knowledge, education and reading on top of our system.

    2. @ Psilomelane: I agree, and well said. I know those brainwashing effects of such religion. The famous quote “Only religion can make good people do bad thing” most likely applies here. I can only say that the open minded religious people are not entirely religious, they are good people who can understand and make a distinction between good and bad, and then pick and choose. But yet, the fact that these heinous acts are being defended by some in such an easy way gives me a chill.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s