Posted on 04/14/2009 2:45:29 PM PDT by reaganaut1
Harvard Islamic chaplain Taha Abdul-Basser ’96 has recently come under fire for controversial statements in which he allegedly endorsed death as a punishment for Islamic apostates.
In a private e-mail to a student last week, Abdul-Basser wrote that there was “great wisdom (hikma) associated with the established and preserved position (capital punishment [for apostates]) and so, even if it makes some uncomfortable in the face of the hegemonic modern human rights discourse, one should not dismiss it out of hand.”
The e-mail was forwarded over Muslim student e-mail lists and later picked up by the blogosphere, sparking debate and, in many cases, criticism of Abdul-Basser from those who have interpreted his statement as supporting the execution of those who leave the Islamic religion.
“I believe he doesn’t belong as the official chaplain,” said one Islamic student, who asked that he not be named to avoid conflicts with Muslim religious authorities. “If the Christian ministers said that people who converted from Christianity should be killed, don’t you think the University should do something?” [SEE CLARIFICATION BELOW]
According to the student, many of Abdul-Basser’s other views are “not in line with liberal values, such as notions of human rights. He privileges the medieval discourse of the Islamic jurists, and is not willing to exercise independent thought and judgment beyond a certain limit,” the student said.
Samad Khurram ’09-’10 said Abdul-Basser’s remarks conflicted with the Harvard United Ministry’s support of freedom of religion.
“I support free speech, freedom of belief and association, so this came as a big shock to me,” Khurram said.
“[His remarks] are the first step towards inciting intolerance and inciting people towards violence,” said a Muslim Harvard student, who requested that he not be named for fear of harming his relationship with the Islamic community.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecrimson.com ...
Note that the Muslim students at Harvard and MIT are wary of criticizing him with anonymity, for fear of being ostracized (or worse?) by other Muslims.
But didn’t The One recently say we’re not at war with Islam?
Yep, pretty much says it all. Afraid of their own community. ROP, right.
Harvard may slap his wrists ... for not being against the death penalty.
Yes, of course, and it’s the patriotic CHRISTIANS who were BORN HERE that are the terrorists, according to Obama’s DHS.
“[Abdul-Basser] was speaking as a chaplain to a student in a private e-mail exchange. One of these e-mails was misinterpreted, misconstrued, and posted on the blogosphere,” said Harvard Islamic Society spokesperson Nafees A. Syed ’10, who praised Abdul-Basser for promoting diversity within HIS and the campus at large.
“His immeasurable contributions should not be overlooked in this matter,” she said.
Uh huh....
CLARIFICATION: The April 14 article "Chaplain's E-mail Sparks Controversy" included a quotation from a named Harvard student, who was later granted anonymity when he revealed that his words could bring him into serious conflict with Muslim religious authorities.
Perfect Love casts out fear ~ Jesus
I would like to associate myself with the above statement that muslims should be killed. Would anyone else like to concur?
We veterans are so much more a threat to our country than these punks, the muslim brotherhood, CAIR, Louie’s nation of islam club, and especially the dreaded and feared DNC.
You know in this topsy-turvy world of late, I'm having trouble deciding how the DHS views this. On the one hand, I'd say this is a thinly veiled threat to the POTUS (given his curious religious upbringing [or lack thereof]). Yet the DHS is MORE fearful of conservatives, veterans, gun rights advocates, Pro-Life supporters and capitalists (hereinafter “Conservatives”). Having read the DHS report, I don't find much to criticize, having lived through the last crisis of faith in government, as it did produce fringe elements that were clearly not firing on all four cylinders.
On the other hand, the DHS’ idea of “freedom of speech” appears to tolerate the inciting of hate among protected groups. I'm just having trouble figuring out who those protected groups are. By intimidating Conservatives who have every right to voice concerns over the economic policies of our current government and on the other hand, allowing the type of criminal speech of this “Chaplain” and the Reverend Wright, Louis Farrakhan, sends a really chaotic message to those of us who simply wish to live simple lives, pay our taxes, worship as we deem fit in churches where the strongest message preached is to hate sin and love what is pure and good and take an active interest in the government of our country.
But for fear, Islam would lose many of its disciples.
It’s internally inconsitent; complete theological tripe.
Apparently Harvard approves of murdering people who exercise Freedom of Religion.
Otherwise, why would they keep this guy on staff?
No Froggy, he’s talking about EX muslims.
If you are a Muslim and don't agree with that statement you should re-read your Koran and Hadiths. - tom
ouch- executing someone who leaves a certain religion
that leaves a mark
and to think of why Harvard was founded and by whom...
I’m all for moslems killing each other.
It’s less work for us humans.
Don’t wild animals kill each other — lizards? Snakes?
So why not moslems?
Most religions have priests and prophets that celebrate life.
These guys celebrate death.
What’s that tell ya?
So what? Why worry about minor distinctions? They used to say "The only good Injun is a dead Injun". I can't agree with that, as Native Americans never harmed me or anyone I know, but muslims have harmed all of us. They harmed anyone who calls himself an American or a civilized person.
Have we become so putty whipped that we can no longer hate our enemies? Do we really have to fall all over ourselves to show that we mean them no harm? Well, I mean them harm, and if I had any power at all I would do them harm. Big harm. I hate them.
During WWII the government did everything it could to whip up anti-Japanese fervor to help fight the war effort, not that much was needed. What do they do now? They tell us that islam is a religion of peace! What kind of moronic jerk would believe that? What kind of defeatist loser would dare to say such a thing, even as muslims continued to kill in the name of their evil cult that is called a religion?
Now we've gone and elected a half-muslim for president. We're done for.
Even if we were living by the values of the Dark Ages (indictment enough of your froggy self), we do not want to despise the EX Muslim. Because the chief reason he would want to be an EX Muslim is because he wants to be Christian.
If we bash anybody we want to bash those who would make it harder for a Muslim to become an EX Muslim.
Surely this is a direct threat to the President?
Surely this is a direct threat to the President?
Next thing you know, he'll be referring to "The Great Satan" and "The Zionist Entity"...
Harvard - home of "the best and the brightest"...
That Harvard Mo Chaplain sucker better watch out or he’ll be getting an honorary degree from Notre Dame! That would enhance the dialog between Catlicks and Moes, don’t you know.
Hey Harvards . . . “Celebrate Diversity”
Islam is 90% government and 10% religion
But actually apostates from Islam are the ones who need our help the most. They are the ones at least cut off from their families (if their lucky) at worst killed by either family or the government, by the people we consider our enemies. Actually a lot of apostates have become speakers against Islam, educating people who wouldn’t known about it. You can hate your enemies all you want, but these guys aren’t it.
Shayhk Taha Abdul-Basser. "Islamic Finance: Incoherence of claims of Incoherence."
Ooh - he claims to be a Sharia finance expert too. Using his pc like a teleprompter, he speaks utter nonsense. Sound like anyone else you know? (Vid at link. The Harvard Imam comes in at approx. 1:10)
(Funny what passes for religion and finance at Harvard these days.)
Publicly disputing that apostates should be killed makes the one disagreeing an apostate. And we know what Mohammod says about apostates:
Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.
Well since all religions are equally valid, the problem must be in our anti-murder laws.
Obviously murdering muslim apostages must be allowed to respect Muslim religious beliefs. While we are at it, we need to change the rape laws, so that if it’s a Muslim who rapes an woman, the woman is considered guilty.
And then obviously, Satanists must be allowed to sacrifice children. /s
Or maybe we just need to get serious about converting Muslim countries from this sick religion. And while we are at it, maybe we could convert our President, too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.