A british man has been barred from exposing his son to Christianity because ex wife is Muslim

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Quran[edit]
See also: Criticism of the Quran
The Quran discusses apostasy in many of its verses. For example:[33]

But those who reject Faith after they accepted it, and then go on adding to their defiance of Faith,- never will their repentance be accepted; for they are those who have (of set purpose) gone astray.

— Quran 3:90
Make ye no excuses: ye have rejected Faith after ye had accepted it. If We pardon some of you, We will punish others amongst you, for that they are in sin.

— Quran 9:66
He who disbelieves in Allah after his having believed, not he who is compelled while his heart is at rest on account of faith, but he who opens (his) breast to disbelief-- on these is the wrath of Allah, and they shall have a grievous chastisement.

— Quran 16:106
Other Qur'anic verses[34] refer to apostasy. The Quran reprimands apostasy in Islam, and appears to suggest that it deserves coercion and severe punishment and that apostates are damned.[35] However, there is no mention of any specific corporal punishment for apostates to which they are to be subjected in this world,,[36][37][38] nor do Qur'anic verses refer, whether explicitly or implicitly, to the need to force an apostate to return to Islam or to kill him if he refuses to do so.[39]

Hadith[edit]
See also: Malik ibn Nuwayrah and Criticism of Hadith
Some hadith refer to punishments for apostasy.[21][40] For example, in the two Sahihs, the most trusted books in Islam after Quran, punishments for apostasy are described:[41][42]

Allah's Apostle said, "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims."

— Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:83:17, see also Sahih Muslim, 16:4152, Sahih Muslim, 16:4154, Sahih Muslim, 20:4490
Ali burnt some people and this news reached Ibn 'Abbas, who said, "Had I been in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, 'Don't punish (anybody) with Allah's Punishment.' No doubt, I would have killed them, for the Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.'

— Sahih al-Bukhari, 4:52:260
A man embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism. Mu'adh bin Jabal came and saw the man with Abu Musa. Mu'adh asked, "What is wrong with this (man)?" Abu Musa replied, "He embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism." Mu'adh said, "I will not sit down unless you kill him (as it is) the verdict of Allah and His Apostle.

— Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:89:271
And in the Muwatta of Imam Malik one finds:

Malik related to me from Abd ar-Rahman ibn Muhammad ibn Abdullah ibn Abd al-Qari that his father said, "A man came to Umar ibn al-Khattab from Abu Musa al-Ashari. Umar asked after various people, and he informed him. Then Umar inquired, 'Do you have any recent news?' He said, 'Yes. A man has become a kafir after his Islam.' Umar asked, 'What have you done with him?' He said, 'We let him approach and struck off his head.' Umar said, 'Didn't you imprison him for three days and feed him a loaf of bread every day and call on him to tawba that he might turn in tawba and return to the command of Allah?' Then Umar said, 'O Allah! I was not present and I did not order it and I am not pleased since it has come to me!'

— Al-Muwatta, 36 18.16
There are many other sunnah that describe capital punishments for apostasy in Islam.[43][44][need quotation to verify] However, in some instances, one finds Hadiths where open cases of apostasy were left unpunished.[45]

A bedouin gave the Pledge of allegiance to Allah's Apostle for Islam and the bedouin got a fever where upon he said to the Prophet "Cancel my Pledge." But the Prophet refused. He came to him (again) saying, "Cancel my Pledge.' But the Prophet refused. Then (the bedouin) left (Medina). Allah's Apostle said: "Medina is like a pair of bellows (furnace): It expels its impurities and brightens and clears its good."

— Sahih al-Bukhari, 9:89:316

Support for it from Quran and Hadith.

It is a minorly controversial position with most scholars supporting execution today.

According to Abdul Rashied Omar, the majority of modern Muslim scholars continue to hold the traditional view that the death penalty for apostasy is required by the two primary sources of Sharia - the Quran and the Hadiths.[13] Others argue that the death penalty is an inappropriate punishment,[18][19][20][21][22] inconsistent with the Qur'anic injunctions such as Q.88:21-22[23] or "no compulsion in religion";[24] and/or that it is not a general rule but it was enacted at a time when the early Muslim community faced enemies who threatened its unity, safety, and security, and needed to prevent and punish the equivalent of desertion or treason,[25] and should be enforced only if apostasy becomes a mechanism of public disobedience and disorder (fitna).[26] As such moderate Muslims reject such penalty.[23] According to critics, the death penalty or other punishment for apostasy in Islam is a violation of universal human rights, and an issue of freedom of faith and conscience.[18][27] Some consider apostasy in Islam to be some form of religious crime, although others do not.[4][5][28]

So you can find thoughts both ways, but the Middle Eastern flavor is weighted toward "off with his head."

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
Stories like this piss me off.

Just more of our media trying to demonise Muslims.

Which seems to have worked.

You have people who got dog-whistled into this thread making snide comments about another religion while thinking that their own personal s*** show of a religion is any better.

News flash: they all blow.

a reply to: ketsuko

Yup. Just as I remembered, nothing in the Koran about executing apostates.



But thanks for quoting Hadiths which are not the Koran.

The daily mail is filth. Don't believe a word they write. This should common knowledge by now.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

It's the same crap that goes on between divorced couples everywhere honestly. In this case, mommy uses the hammer of faith to eff with daddy.

originally posted by: chuck258
Well, I'm not usually one to argue about semantics, but you are citing US case law and this was a British case.

United States and British law are very similar. I would not be surprised if they had similar standards.

If she has custody she makes the decision and tough nuggets for the old man.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

There is also probably a lot more to this story than the daily fail is letting on, the entire article is written from the fathers perspective. I would suspect there is a little more to this that came out in court that the media won't be reporting because it does not fit with their agenda.

Wasn't a Saudi man recently put to death for being an atheist?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Wasn't a Saudi man recently put to death for being an atheist?

And that has zero to do with this topic at hand.

originally posted by: ketsuko
It's the same crap that goes on between divorced couples everywhere honestly. In this case, mommy uses the hammer of faith to eff with daddy.

Except the Daily Mail tried to get everyone fired up over a non-issue because (oh noes!) Jesus was somehow involved.

Happy Fertility Holiday everyone, I am going to eat some shawarma and kibbeh.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Wasn't a Saudi man recently put to death for being an atheist?

And that has zero to do with this topic at hand.

Actually, someone mentioned apostasy.

I was trying to add to the conversation.

Children normally create their own imaginary friends; their parents shouldn't be introducing them to any others.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I'd be more sympathetic to your argument if Muslims only followed the one. But it's like saying that a position Mormons follow found in the book of Mormon isn't what they follow because you can't find it in the Bible.

For many, both carry about the same weight and both form the underpinnings of Shari'a Law which is what most Middle Eastern countries operate under. Go check out their legal codes and you'll find out that they do execute people for apostasy. The same Muslim scholars I cited? They do not operate solely from the Quran, but from the Quran and the Hadith when they determine their rulings.

In fact, here is a case of a women who was convicted of both adultery and apostasy under Shari'a. She was a formerly Muslim women who became Christian and married a Christian man. Since she was pregnant, her death sentence was put off until her baby could be born.

Ibrahim was born to a Sudanese Muslim father and an Ethiopian Orthodox mother. Her father left when she was 6 years old, and Ibrahim was raised by her mother as a Christian.

However, because her father was Muslim, the courts considered her to be the same, which would mean her marriage to a non-Muslim man is void.

Tell me these aren't similar circumstances to what we're seeing except for a few particulars in who has the child and the faiths in question and where the case is. Welcome to Shari'a.

In the end, I think she was released and allowed to leave with her family because of the international attention the case received.

originally posted by: ketsuko
I'd be more sympathetic to your argument...

The same could be said of all religions. There are intolerant religious nutters in all faiths.

We are also not discussing Sharia Law, this is British Common Law and since the Jesus-loving old man does not have custody she can raise their child with her wacky beliefs instead of his.

According the news Father is muslim too but do not "believe" . He wants his child to be ok with other religions too and not be brainwashed with Quran as he was. He is not a christian but seen christians as a good people and not like what Quran and imams have taught him them to be.
He wants his child to decide what to believe when he is old enough... what is wrong with that ?

A British father has been banned from taking his son to a church after the boy's Muslim mother won a controversial court order preventing the boy from attending.

The father – a non-practising Muslim who has forged close connections to his local Christian community and is divorced from the boy's mother – has been warned that he could be denied access to the nine-year-old if he attempts to take him to church or to a leisure centre it runs.

Now the father, who was born in the UK to Pakistani parents, is challenging the ruling made by District Judge Williscroft at Derby County Court earlier this month.

Last week, he lodged an appeal with the High Court to have the order overturned. 'This judge is simply scared of being branded Islamophobic,' he said. 'I want my son to have a balanced life in which he is exposed to different faiths and can make up his own mind about which, if any, religion he follows.'

daily mail

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Are we? This could have been an arbitration made by a Shari'a Family Law court and signed off on by a judge.

Other services related to family issues might be offered by a Sharia council. Family mediation is one example.

Some campaigners worry about using mediation by religious bodies to work out agreements about children and finances after a marriage breaks down.

In 2014 Baroness Cox, a member of the House of Lords, tried to introduce a law to ensure that women aren't disadvantaged in mediation by religious bodies, and make clear that they aren't a court.

But, formally, this is already the case.

While feuding couples have to at least consider mediation before going to court, it doesn't override family law. A court has to sign off on any agreement made after divorce for it to be legally binding, and won't do so if the judge thinks it's unfair.

In 2013, the High Court was asked by an Orthodox Jewish couple to accept the ruling of a Jewish religious court on post-divorce family arrangements. The judge said that while the agreement would carry weight, it would be non-binding—neither party could get around English law by agreeing to abide by the decision of another tribunal.

Rather than open the door to "Sharia divorces", as some newspapers reported, the judgment confirmed that agreements made in a religious form are ultimately subject to English law.

So, get the Shari'a Court to make the aribtration agreement and the judge decides it's fair because courts tend to always side with the mother.

originally posted by: dollukka
...what is wrong with that ?

A British father has been banned from taking his son to a church after the boy's Muslim mother won a controversial court order preventing the boy from attending.

The father – a non-practising Muslim who has forged close connections to his local Christian community and is divorced from the boy's mother – has been warned that he could be denied access to the nine-year-old if he attempts to take him to church or to a leisure centre it runs.

Now the father, who was born in the UK to Pakistani parents, is challenging the ruling made by District Judge Williscroft at Derby County Court earlier this month.

Last week, he lodged an appeal with the High Court to have the order overturned. 'This judge is simply scared of being branded Islamophobic,' he said. 'I want my son to have a balanced life in which he is exposed to different faiths and can make up his own mind about which, if any, religion he follows.'

daily mail

He has no parental rights so has no say on what his son can or cannot be exposed to. He has to get permission from his ex wife (as she has all the rights) and she said no.

It's really that simple.

originally posted by: ketsuko
Are we? This could have been an arbitration made by a Shari'a Family Law court and signed off on by a judge.

You think? How about, no.

If that were actually the case the Daily Mail would not have missed the opportunity to get all the Christians panties in a twist by mentioning 'Sharia'.

Try reading the article prior to propagandizing:

Now the father, who was born in the UK to Pakistani parents, is challenging the ruling made by District Judge Williscroft at Derby County Court earlier this month.

Because the mother is a devout Muslim and, believes the child will "become confused" if he is exposed to religion and culture that is not Islamic.

confused when he realizes that Islam is not a 'religion of peace'?

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

There is also probably a lot more to this story than the daily fail is letting on, the entire article is written from the fathers perspective. I would suspect there is a little more to this that came out in court that the media won't be reporting because it does not fit with their agenda.

I would agree with you on this point. I tried looking but really couldn't find an article that wasn't the Daily Mail. Probably because the father went to the Daily mail. The fact however, that a Progressive leaning news source didn't jump in to discredit, or give a "neutral" (read, Anti-Male, Anti-Christian) viewpoint says something to me. Something like "no reasonable person who reads both stances would agree with the outcome". That would be like counting on Fox news to cast religion in a negative light or MSNBC to condemn BLM for blocking ambulances.