Is Buddhism a Failure?

[Tyler]

Naturally, with little knowledge of Pakistan in specific, and Muslim countries in general. I do not expect that someone would understand, especially not people who have a vested interest in misrepresenting and demonizing Islam.

I have no more a vested interest in misrepresenting Islam than you do misrepresenting Canada. I am not anti-Islam.

When you go to Pakistan, then please get back to me on this subject. Otherwise your points are mere conjecture. People love to talk about issues in which they have zero knowledge.

You said laws are completely open for all religions. They are not. There are religious restrictions in the law. You were wrong. I don't need to go to Pakistan to read their laws.

None that the same way Muslims cannot enter churches with the intent purpose to preach their religion in Pakistan, it works in all circumstances. The law is designed to prevent strife between different religious communities, the kind of strife witnessed in some areas of India by Hindu extremists against Muslims and Christians for example.

I wouldn't support such laws in any case. Some secular humanists believe that anti-abortion activists and religious evangelizers should be banned from abortion clinics and other places. I don't agree with this. I struggle to find any situation where I agree with restricting free speech.

 

[swarm]

I struggle to find any situation where I agree with restricting free speech.

When they aren't there to speak works for me.

 

[Testing]

Naturally, with little knowledge of Pakistan in specific, and Muslim countries in general. I do not expect that someone would understand, especially not people who have a vested interest in misrepresenting and demonizing Islam.

When you go to Pakistan, then please get back to me on this subject. Otherwise your points are mere conjecture. People love to talk about issues in which they have zero knowledge.

I have been to Pakistan and human rights situation is really bad there especially with regards to Ahmadis. Ahmadis are practically treated as slaves with no explicit rights whatsoever, no matter what the claims of the majority are.

• There are Ahmadi specific laws or laws that target Ahmadis such as this one;

ORDINANCE NO. XX OF 1984
PART II - AMENDMENT OF THE PAKISTAN PENAL CODE (ACT XLV OF 1860)
(3) 298C... Any person of the Quadiani group or the Lahori group (who call themselves ‘Ahmadis’ or by any other name), who … invites others to accept his faith, by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representations, or in any manner whatsoever outrages the religious feelings of Muslims, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.

• Ahmadis are vilified and hatred is spread against them via mainstream media, or via government sponsored conferences

PAKISTAN: No action taken against Geo TV presenter who incited Muslims to murder members of Pakistan minority on air

The government of Pakistan has not held the presenter of a popular TV program on Geo TV, accountable for stoking the already-prevalent religious hatred of Pakistan's beleaguered Ahmadi minority, on 7 September, 2008.

Anchor person Dr Amir Liaquat Hussain declared, on air, the murder of Ahmadi sect members to be the religious duty of devout Muslims. He made the statement on Alim Online, a religious affairs program on Geo TV, which is a prominent Dubai-based Pakistani television channel. Hussain urged his two co-presenters to agree, and in a show on 9 September, he repeated the suggestion. In the 48 hours after the first broadcast, two Ahmadi community leaders were lynched and murdered...

link: ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2008statements/1694/
Geo TV is the largest TV network pf Pakistan.

Government of Punjab is Conspiring to Incite Hatred Against Ahmadis

link: ahmadiyya.com.pk/government-of-punjab-is-conspiring-to-incite-hatred-against-ahmadis/

As a result of this spread of hatred, attacks on Ahmadi lives occur;

Ahmadi couple found dead in Multan

LAHORE: Blindfolded bodies of an Ahmadi couple were found from their house in Multan with hands tied behind their backs. The two were doctors by profession and had been murdered on March 14, a press statement by the Ahmadiyya community said on Monday. According to the statement, Dr Shiraz Ahmad Bajwa (37) and his wife Dr Noreen Bajwa (29) were killed in a brutal attack at their house in WAPDA Colony, Multan. It said the two doctors had been receiving threats for some time due to their religious beliefs. The housekeeper found the body of Dr Shiraz in the bedroom, with visible marks of strangulation, and Dr Noreen in the living room, the statement said. staff report

link: dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009%5C03%5C17%5Cstory_17-3-2009_pg7_10

• Ahmadis are arrested and charged arbitrarily or for ridiculous reasons;

PAKISTAN: Two murdered and 15 charged as discrimination against Ahmadis continues unabated

link: ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2009statements/1947/

LAHORE: Five Ahmadis detained on charges of blasphemy in Layyah district have been held without virtually any proof or witnesses, the Human Rights Commission (HRCP) said on Thursday.

link: hrcp-web.org/print.cfm?proId=685

• The ruling parties also ensures that Ahmadis do not get justice through court by pressurising courts

‘MNA promoting violent protest against Ahmadis’

LAHORE: A Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) member of National Assembly from Layyah has instigated the local people to observe a protest today (Tuesday) against four teenagers and a man belonging to the Ahmadiyya community arrested on the charges of blasphemy, a rights body said on Monday. The accused will be brought before a court today. A press release issued on Monday by the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) stated that some radical groups had announced a show of strength against Ahmadis to pressurise the court not to grant bail to the five Ahmadis. The accused were arrested on January 28 on charges of writing blasphemous comments in a mosque toilet. They were shifted to Dera Ghazi Khan Central Jail, where the fundamentalist groups had asked other inmates to ‘fix up’ the Ahmadis, according to the statement. The commission urged the Punjab government to stop the violent campaign. staff report

Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) is the ruling party in Punjab, they have conspired with fundamentalists groups like banned jamaat-udawa on this matter - this has been reported by Human Rights Commission of Pakistan
link: dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009\02\17\story_17-2-2009_pg13_4

• A couple of violent mass movements caused killings of scores of Ahmadis with their properties destroyed;

Court of Enquiry Report on Anti-Ahmadiyya riots of 1953
link: thepersecution.org/dl/report_1953.pdf

1974 Anti-Ahmadiyya riots facts/figures
link: thepersecution.org/facts/h71-80.html

• Ahmadis are heavily profiled and discrimination in jobs and educations is a norm.

Engineering University Application Form -- See 'Muslims Only' declaration at bottom of form
link: uet.edu.pk/export/sites/UETWebPortal/admission/admissioninfo/Prospectus/Forms/_F-I.pdf

Similar declarations are present on application forms for National ID Card, Passport and Government jobs.

• Election Commission of Pakistan makes one list of voters for all citizens of Pakistan and a separate list for Ahmadis only. This was complained about by the EU observers in the last elections.

PAKISTAN: 38 million people are denied their right to vote

The primary feature of the electoral list is that it is based on a separate electoral system contrary, to the government’s claim that elections are being held in a joint electoral system. The Ahmadiyya community names are listed separately from those of the Muslims and non-Muslim communities. By being listed separately from Muslims and non-Muslims alike, the Ahmadiyya community faces further discrimination.

link: ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2007statements/1106/

The Election Commission acting under inexplicable pressure and expediency issued the following order vide its circular [No.F.1 (6)/2001-Cord] of 17th January, 2007: “I am directed to say that the competent authority has been pleased to decide that separate supplementary lists of draft electoral rolls for Ahmadis / Quadianis for the electoral areas concerned wherever they are registered may be prepared and published thereby mentioning” (For Quadianis, Men / Women)” as the case may be.”

This regulation has resulted in two lists, one general list for all Pakistani Citizens and the other list exclusively for Ahmadis a blatant marginalization and stigmatization.

link: rationality.ca/2008/02/19/free-and-fair-elections-claim-empty-of-substance/

These are just a few examples. In short Pakistanis go to extra-ordinary lengths to persecute Ahmadis.

Pakistan’s only Nobel Prize winner [Physics, 1979] was an Ahmadi.

 

[DiamondHearts]

The fact is that people with vested interests often attempt to invent supposed religious discrimination by citing excerpts of laws, without including all the laws relating to this subject. I suggest you do some more research.

FACT: Ahmadiyyas are forbidden to refer to themselves as Muslims and propagate their religion in Mosques. This is designed to prevent communal strife.

FALSE: Ahmadiyyas are discriminated in courts or politics just for being Ahmadiyyas.

FACT: Construction of Ahmadiyya mosques and religious centers are allowed, as long as they are have signs informing people they are Ahmadiyya, to prevent Muslim-Ahmadiyya strife.

FALSE: Attacks against Ahmadiyyas are encouraged in Pakistan by political parties and the government.

FACT: Ahmadiyyas are reserved parliamentary seats by the government and discrimination against Ahmadiyyas, on the basis of religion, is illegal in Pakistan and punishable by fines or jail.

Declaring of Ahmadiyyas as Non-Muslim is not persecution, as some Ahmadiyyas allege. All Muslims (Sunni/Shia/etc) do not view Ahmadiyyas as Muslims (same way as Christians don't view Mormons as Christians), and thus their organizations have petitioned the government to ban their missionaries from engaging in clandestine propagation in their mosques and centers. That is the whole reason that these laws are designed.

 

[Tyler]

The section prohibits Ahmadis from...preaching or propagating their faith, inviting others to accept the Ahmadi faith, and insulting the religious feelings of Muslims.

I'd be curious to see what the actual wording of the law is on the former two, but even the last one is greatly unjust.

The vague wording of the provision that forbids Ahmadis from "directly or indirectly" posing as Muslims enabled mainstream Muslim religious leaders to bring charges against Ahmadis for using the standard Muslim greeting form and for naming their children Muhammad.

The excerpt doesn't say how often these charges work. Even if it's never, this still helps to create conflict between the two groups. Frequent litigation is not that good for relationships. I think the government is not so much trying to avoid strife, they just want to make sure the upper hand is with the Muslims in law.

There's more, but I'll probably not write it up till monday. I'm too busy on the weekends and my home computer is actually strange lately.

 

[GeoffP]

The fact is that people with vested interests often attempt to invent supposed religious discrimination by citing excerpts of laws, without including all the laws relating to this subject. I suggest you do some more research.

FACT: Ahmadiyyas are forbidden to refer to themselves as Muslims and propagate their religion in Mosques. This is designed to prevent communal strife.

With the first argument, you've illustrated how your succeeding counter-arguments are nonsensical.

And why the thread bashing Buddhism? Countertop? Meet pot.

 

[(Q)]

Naturally, with little knowledge of Pakistan in specific, and Muslim countries in general. I do not expect that someone would understand, especially not people who have a vested interest in misrepresenting and demonizing Islam.

Clearly, after providing links to your unfounded claims of Pakistan, it's clear YOU are the one with little knowledge and have to lie about to make up other false claims of demonizing.

Very sad, indeed.

 

[S.A.M.]

Frankly I don't see the point in negating Ahmediyas as Muslims. If they believe in God and acknowledge Mohammed as a messenger they are Muslims. If they decide that some guy came back as a reincarnation of Christ and decide he's the messiah, well that does not negate the Shahadah.

Its ironic that the Ahmediyas want to be referred to as Muslims and are ostracised, while the Bahais don't and al Azhar says they do because they too qualify based on their acceptance of God and Mohammed, inspite of picking Bahaullah as their messiah.

 

[swarm]

Ahmediyas muslims. Those damn Samaritans.

 

[swarm]

So I guess we are talking about the Ahmediya Mohammediya Ibrahimiya Hanifiya Tijaniya Sūfī Mulims?

I would say Sufis seem pretty muslim to me.

 

[quadraphonics]

All Muslims (Sunni/Shia/etc) do not view Ahmadiyyas as Muslims.

Except for the ones who do. Such as the Ahmadiyyas themselves.

I thought anyone who affirmed that there is only one God, and that Mohammed was his messenger, is a Muslim? But apparently it's actually decided by Pakistani politicians, on the basis of the prejudices of politically-connected reactionaries.

(same way as Christians don't view Mormons as Christians),

That is an extreme view held only by a tiny fringe of Christians (at least in the US). No American would have any trouble recognizing a law defining Mormons as non-Christian as oppression, nor would they expect to publicly air such a view without receiving strongly negative reactions. Attempting to define someone else's religion for them is one of the worst acts of intellectual violence you can commit. If someone isn't free to define their own spirituality, what agency is left to them?

There is a reason they moved headquarters out of Pakistan after they were Constitutionally defined as non-Muslims. This designation - printed on their travel documents - prevents all Pakistani Ahmadiyyas from going on the Hajj, and so is a gross violation of their religious freedoms.

How is it that allowing these people to freely define their own religion is such a threat to you?

 

[GeoffP]

:shrug: Mormons are Christians; but honestly, who cares? If they weren't, why should that negate their rights?

 

[jmpet]

Buddhism is a success in that it strives not to become a thing of worship. All other faiths have failed in this regard, and this why ten thousand years from now there will still be Buddhists.

 

[iceaura]

Frankly I don't see the point in negating Ahmediyas as Muslims.

You don't? It doesn't seem all that mysterious, to an outsider - religions are famous for inspiring that kind of situation.

It's called a "split", sometimes.

FACT: Construction of Ahmadiyya mosques and religious centers are allowed, as long as they are have signs informing people they are Ahmadiyya, to prevent Muslim-Ahmadiyya strife.

In some States of the US they used to have similar laws regarding Negro swimming pools - Negros were allowed to construct swimming pools and the like, as long as they posted signs informing people they were Negro swimming pools, to prevent Negro-Caucasian strife.

 

[DiamondHearts]

In some States of the US they used to have similar laws regarding Negro swimming pools - Negros were allowed to construct swimming pools and the like, as long as they posted signs informing people they were Negro swimming pools, to prevent Negro-Caucasian strife.

Yes, however Ahmadiyyas are not banned from eating, drinking, or even living in the same areas as other religious groups (Muslims, Christians, Sikh, Hindus). Rather laughable comparison.

This specific case was ruled so as to preserve the peace. As the Western society is mostly secular, this concept is understandably foreign. The issue is resolved in the US by property laws, for example Jews can't enter Baptist churches to preach their religion and secretly convert churchgoers, because the owners of the property would have them kicked out.

Pakistan's laws are designed to prevent subversive preaching, under a false cover, which all Muslims (Sunni/Shia/etc) jointly petitioned the government to put an end to. They can still preach their religion and practice their religion, but only under the guise of their religion, not some else's religion.

As far as the definition of a Muslim, one has to believe the following:

1. There is one and only one God, the God of Abraham

2. Prophet Muhammad (peace be to him) is the servant and final messenger of God

There are further six articles of faith, belief in God, his books (revealed Torah, Injeel, Zabur, and the Quran), His angels, His prophets (Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad being the major ones (peace be upon them all)), the Day of Judgment (Afterlife), and Al-Qadr (supremacy of God's will, knowledge of all things at all times).

Islamic scholars have reached a consensus as to which groups are Muslims, and which groups are not. This was due to the rise of heretic movements.

Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama'ah (Sunni) = Four Madhabs of Imams Abu Hanifa, Shafi'i, Malik, and Ahmad bin Hanbal. The Salafi, Wahhabi, and Ahle Hadith.

Shi'a/ Shi'i = Madhab of Imam Jafar (Ithna Ash'ari = Twelver), Ibadi

The Sufi are not technically another sect. All groups mentioned above, except the Salafi, Wahhabi, and Ahle Hadith are Sufi (in the Western definition). Furthermore, Sufi is a genetic word for teacher or Imam in many regions, and thus a great teacher and holy man is referred to as a Sufi. So those who believe Sufism (personal spiritual insight through contemplation, zikr), are not Sufis until they become teachers themselves. Much of it is based on spiritual lineage as well.

 

[Tyler]

Pakistan's laws are designed to prevent subversive preaching, under a false cover, which all Muslims (Sunni/Shia/etc) jointly petitioned the government to put an end to. They can still preach their religion and practice their religion, but only under the guise of their religion, not some else's religion.

That's called tyranny of the majority.

Jews for Jesus call themselves Jews even though most Jews can't understand how they're properly Jews. And they do try to convert many people. And there's no law about that.

Islamic scholars have reached a consensus as to which groups are Muslims, and which groups are not. This was due to the rise of heretic movements.

That's fine. Scholars can rule whichever way they want to; such is intellectual freedom. As soon as law enshrines one group of people's opinion as the only true interpretation of a religion, it is restricting the freedom of others.

You may say that it is meant in good faith in the sense of reducing violence, but that's an extremely slippery slope to fall down. Exchanging liberty for security is a problem all nations wrestle with. Perhaps you and I simply disagree on where the line should be drawn. But you should understand that such reasoning is exactly what leads to modern authoritarian states and military dictatorships like China or Burma.

Restricting religious freedom - and I'm an atheist (or, for sam's benefit, a Tyler's positionist) - is about the worst thing you can do alongside restricting free speech or thought.

I'm sure you have no problem with it. After all, it doesn't hurt you in any way. However most reports out of Pakistan by Ahmadiyyas tend to mention a great deal of prejudice hurled their way. You're nuts if you think enshrining that prejudice in law reduces tension. I can't think of one example in all of history where singling out one ethnic or religious group as a special case in the law made tensions ease.

 

[S.A.M.]

Just FYI, al Azhar is the one of the three largest bodies of Islamic scholars and they endorse the Ahmadiyas as Islamic

http://www.muslim.org/books/azhar-cert.htm

So its a local Pakistani thing.

 

[Tyler]

Found it...

PART II - AMENDMENT OF THE PAKISTAN PENAL CODE
(ACT XLV OF 1860)

(1)

Any person of the Quadiani group or the Lahori group (who call themselves ‘Ahmadis’ or by any other name) who by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation;
(a) refers to, or addresses, any person, other than a Caliph or companion of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him),as ‘Ameerul Mumineen’, ‘Khalifa-tui-Mumineen’, ‘Khalifa-tul-Muslimeen’, ‘Sahaabi’ or ‘Razi Allah Anho’
(b) refers to, or addresses, any person, other than a wife of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) as ‘Ummul-Mumineen’
(c) refers to, or addresses, any person, other than a member of the family (Ahle-bait) of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), as ‘Ahle-bait’; or
(d) refers to, or names, or calls, his place of worship as ‘Masjid’;
shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.

That is anti-free speech, anti-religious freedom. It has nothing to do with hanging outside of mosques. If the only thing they wanted to stop was proselytizing outside of mosques, they should have just said "no proselytizing outside of mosques."

2)
Any person of the Quadiani group or Lahori group (who call themselves Ahmadis or by any other name) who by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation, refers to the mode or form of call to prayers followed by his faith as ‘Azan’ or recites Azan as used by the Muslims, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Again a restriction on free speech.

298C. Person of Quadiani group etc., calling himself a Muslim or preaching or propagating his faith.
Any person of the Quadiani group or the Lahori group (who call themselves ‘Ahmadis’ or by any other name), who, directly or indirectly, poses himself as Muslim, or calls, or refers to, his faith as Islam, or preaches or propagates his faith, or invites others to accept his faith, by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representations, or in any manner whatsoever outrages the religious feelings of Muslims, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.”

Diamond, they're not even trying to pretend that it's for the sake of security, like you are. It is very clearly written as being a law to protect the feelings of Muslims over those of Ahmadiyyas.

Insertion of new section 295-C, Act XLV of 1860. In the Pakistan Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), after section 295-B, the following new section shall be inserted, namely:
295-C.

Use of derogatory remarks, etc. in respect of the Holy Prophet. Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by visible representation, or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine."

The law protects the free speech of Muslims. Not other people.

---------

Moreover, even if you were right your argument still doesn't negate the fact that it is religious discrimination. It is the minority group that is forbidden from pushing it's interpretation of Islam. The majority group is free to push it's own, state-sponsored, interpretation of Islam.

I'm not sure how you could possibly defend that as being free or just.

 

[(Q)]

As far as the definition of a Muslim, one has to believe the following:

1. There is one and only one God, the God of Abraham


Islamic scholars have reached a consensus as to which groups are Muslims, and which groups are not.

Try and think how your definition of a Muslim is contradicted by your latter claim.

 

[Tyler]

A BILL

to make a law for the Apostasy

WHEREAS it is expedient to make a law for the Apostasy and for the purposes hereinafter appearing;

It is hereby enacted as follows:-

1.Short title, extent and Commencement:-(1) This Act may be called the Apostasy Act, 2006.

(2)

It extends to the whole of Pakistan.
(3)

It shall come into force at once.
2.Definitions:- In this Act, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context:-

(a)

“Apostasy” means backing out of any Muslim from Islam including requisites of Deen which also embody the finality of prophet hood of Hazrat Muhammad (S.A.W.);
(b)

“Apostate” means any such person who commits apostasy; and
(c)

“Penitence” means that the apostate makes a return from apostasy and turns to Deen-e-Islam.
3.The condition of commission of apostasy:- It is necessary for the commissioning of the offence of apostasy that the offender of it be:-

(a)

an adult;
(b)

an sane;
(c)

have willingly caused a commission of apostasy.
Explanation:-

“An adult means a person who has attained the age of eighteen years in case of male and sixteen years in case of female or physically has reached to the limit of maturity or whatever thing amongst these two things occurs first.
4.Proof of apostasy:- The offence of apostasy shall be proved in any one way of following:-

(a)

The accused personally may confess before the competent court that he has nwdc a commission of the offence of apostasy; or
(b)

At least two adult male witnesses about whom the court is satisfied in regard of evidence of purification that they are just ones and they give evidence of this thing that the accused has made a commission of apostasy.
(c)

have willingly caused a commission of apostasy.
Explanation No.1:-

Evidence of purification means that methodology through which the court gets information about any witness that whether he is just or unjust.
Explanation No.2:-

“Just” means such a Muslim who is known for observing religious obligations and duties and refraining himself from major sins.
5.Asking Penitence from apostate:- (1) When under the requirement of section 4, the proof of offence of apostasy is made available, the court shall ask the apostate to make penitence from apostasy; If the accused does not immediately make penitence, the court shall give him a period of threodays or suchperiod as the court may deem fit for considering and thinking over it but this period shallinot exceed one month. During this period, the accused shall be put in prison and shall be asked to make a return to Islam in accordance with rules.
(2) If the apostate tenders penitence immediately after getting penitence offer or within the prescribed period under sub-section (1), his penitence shall be accepted and he shall be exonerated but if he shows insistence on his apostasy while rejecting the penitence offer, he shall be punished under section (7).

6.The repetition of offence of apostasy:- If any person after making penitence for the first offence of apostasy and one account of it getting pardon commits again the offence of apostasy, the provisions of section (5) with due modifications shall be applied to him.

Provided that any person who commits the offence of apostasy for the second time or third time, he shall be punished with rigorous or simple punishment which may extend to two years. Provided further that if any person who commits the offence of apostasy for the fourth time, he shall be punishable to the sentence prescribed in section (7).

7.Punishment for apostasy:- (1) If a male person makes the commission of apostasy offence, he shall be awarded death sentence.

Provided that if the apostate tenders penitence before issuance or at the time of death sentence or agrees to tender penitence, he shall be immediately produced before the court for further orders.

(2)If the female person makes the commission of apostasy offence, she shall be put in prison till she tenders her penitence.
8.The property of the apostate:- (1) On proposing legal action against any apostate on the ground Of apostasy, the court Shall suspend all his rights over his property including his right of possession.

(2)

All his property rights shall stand restored in case of being acquitted by the court on the ground of tendering penitence by the apostate.
(3)

Whereas any person was given death sentence in the commission of apostasy offence, his property acquired before’ the commission of offence shall be transferred to his Muslim heirs and the property acquired after the commission of offence shall be forfeited in favour of the Government.
(4)

All the rights of property owned by the female apostate shall remain suspended till her death or penitence from the offence. Her property shall stand transferred to her Muslim heirs in case of her death in the state of apostasy and the property acquired after the commission of the offence shall be forfeited in favour of the Government and in case of penitence from apostasy, her all property rights shall stand restored and it shall be deemed that these rights are perennially vested with her.

9.The right of guardianship of the children of apostate and of the custody of their property:- The right of the apostate relating to the matter of guardianship over minor children and property or right of Hizanat of the female apostate shall remain suspended till the death or penitence of the male apostate or female apostate and the court shall exercise the power to appoint a guardian for the guardianship for minor children of male apostate or female apostate and of their property and who shall be responsible for the management and arrangement of the property of minor or minors and in case of tendering penitence or getting acquittal from the court, the rights of the apostate shall stand restored.

Provided that a breast feeding infant shall be allowed to remain in the Hizanat of the female apostate.
10Iddat:- The commencement of iddat shall start from that date on which the apostasy offence of the apostate is finally proved.

(2)

The iddat of the female apostate shall be four months and ten days or till delivery in case of being pregnant.
(3)

The marriage of the female apostate shall stand intact in case of tendering penitence during her iddat but tendering penitence after iddat, her re-marriage with her husband shall be legalized.

11.Act to over-ride all other laws:- The provisions of this Act shall over ride all other laws for the time being in force

I can't find any up-to-date sources on the state of this bill, so I'm not sure if it passed or not.

That said... Are you honestly going to tell me that a country where such a bill at the very least gained popular support and was debate on the floor of parliament is a free nation? One that encourages religious freedoms? How on earth would you reconcile that with a massive portion of the population suggesting that those who convert away from Islam ought to be killed?

I understand you're simply going to support anything any Muslim person or nation does, but even this seems a bit ridiculous. Something more than a hunch tells me that if the Knesset passed around a bill suggesting that converts to Islam ought to be killed you'd be more than a tad pissed off.