I think I have found a fine example of how far religious governments will go to keep safe from any and all attacks on their, most liekly deranged, ideology.
The Independent recently published a news report on an Afghan man who was recently sentenced to death for, get this… reading an article about woman’s rights.
A young man, a student of journalism, is sentenced to death by an Islamic court for downloading a report from the internet. The sentence is then upheld by the country’s rulers.
The accusation that led to his sentence? Blasphemy. I hope I am not the only one who finds it sick that people are sentenced to any punishment at all for speaking out, much less for simply reading something. I understand this is the picture of a modern fundamentalist Islam society, but in a world with so many human rights groups and worldwide protection agencies, how can any government find it to be worth the trouble?
As soon as I asked that question I came to the realization of who was running the courts that sentenced him…
…tried by religious judges without being allowed legal representation and sentenced to death.
I’m beginning to come to the conclusion that throughout history, if anyone is sentenced to death without any form of legal representation, that they are either poor, or religion is some how involved. And this man, a student of Journalism, does not seem to fit the profile of the subjugated poor.
A direct quote from Aminuddin Muzafari, the first secretary of the houses of parliament,
“People should realize that as we are representatives of an Islamic country therefore we can never tolerate insults to reverences of Islamic religion.”
This downloaded document must have contained a grand heretical cartoon of Muhammad or overly anti-Islamic teachings, right? No. The documents were about woman rights. Specifically about how the Koran was possibly misinterpreted on the behalf of it justifying the oppression of women.
I can understand how theoretically, Islam is a peaceful religion. I can see why all Muslims are not regarded as extremist. But can someone please explain to me how a country, free from Taliban rule for almost 7 years, is still this fundamentally extreme? Is this not proof that either the current leaders of the Muslim faith, or the Muslim faith itself, is that of extremism?
The senate is even telling its officials not to be “influenced by outside un-Islamic views”
I hate to pick on a single religion when several of these concepts hold true for all of them, but any religion that discourages, or even worse, disallows its followers to not only be informed, but also does not allow them to even look at outside viewpoints, is closer to a cult in my books.