From: ahmed@dsg.cs.tcd.ie (Ahmed El-Habbash)
Subject: Re: islam & ethnicity
Organization: DSG, Dept. of Computer Science, Trinity College Dublin
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 14:34:39 GMT

In <44067@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> revans@euclid.ucsd.edu (Ron Evans) writes:

><1993Jan25.030623.27809@cs.brown.edu> dzk@cs.brown.edu (Danny Keren) writes:

>You simply deleted my questions:
>1) Was Rushdie sentenced to death *because he is considered a Moslem*,
>   which makes his crime worse?
>2) If the answer to 1) is "yes", why was he considered a Moslem?

>	While awaiting answers from Mr. Muhanna, allow me to
>	offer my opinions (based in part on email correspondence
>	with Muslims).

>	1) Yes, Rushdie's "crime" was deemed worse because he was
>	   a Muslim.  Muslims have a special obligation not to
>	   abandon, insult, or mock Islam.  It may also be true 
>	   that an Islamic state would have punished Rushdie
>	   had he been Christian, but I don't believe the penalty
>           would have been death.  I would like to hear any opposing
>           opinions on this matter.
>	2) I believe others will consider a person to be Muslim if
>           they know the person has been brought up in a Muslim
>	   home or if they know the person is a convert to Islam.
>           Could Rushdie have been spared all this grief had he
>	   publicly renounced Islam before writing The Satanic
>	   Verses?  That is not clear, because the penalty for
>           renouncing Islam can also be death, according to the
>           hadith posted earlier under the title "Islam and
>	   apostacy".  

>-- 
>Ron Evans (revans@math.ucsd.edu)

Applying the Islamic law within an Islamic state is not different from
applying any law in any state. The Islamic law in any Islamic state must
apply to all people under that state regardless of whether those people
are Muslim or have any other religion. A state is called an Islamic state 
only when the Islamic law is implemented and accepted by the people of that
state, even if the majority are nonmuslim. On the other hand a state of
100% muslim population is not Islamic if the Islamic law is not
applicable.

Now the question about Salman Rushdi, whether he is Muslim or nonmuslim,
is an irrelevant question. 
He is not living under any Islamic state, so he cannot be tried under an
Islamic law, unless the Islamic state can arrange with the state where
Rushdi lives, or the Islamic state can force its rules by other ways.
This is not unique for the Islamic law, however, and we have many examples 
where countries got involved in wars and bad relations for similar reasons. 

As you see I didn't talk about Rushdi's guilt, whether he deserves death
or he does not. The Prophet (SAW) used to be, at some situations, subjected
to direct insults and attacks, and he didn't kill the criminals nor
asked other muslims to kill them, and at other situations he demanded
killing such criminals. So the Islamic law is not blind and rigid, there
is a room to take the best of rules for the different circumstances, but
without deviating far from the basic guidelines of the Quran and the
examples set by the Prophet (SAW).


-- 
Ahmed I. El-Habbash, 
Department of Computer Science, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland.
Tel: office: +353-1-7021524,  Home: +353-1-937402.
	
Newsgroups: talk.politics.mideast