Criticizing Islam

"As the Special Rapporteur has previously emphasized, for the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion to be fully realized, robust examination and criticism of religious doctrines and practices — even in a harsh manner — must [...] be allowed."1

"The Special Rapporteur also reiterates his concern in relation to anti-blasphemy laws, which are inherently vague and leave the entire concept open to abuse. He wishes to underscore once again that international human rights law protects individuals and not abstract concepts such as religion, belief systems or institutions, as also affirmed by the Human Rights Committee (CCPR/C/GC/34,para. 48). Moreover, the right to freedom of religion or belief, as enshrined in relevant international legal standards, does not include the right to have a religion or belief that is free from criticism or ridicule. Indeed, the right to freedom of expression includes the right to scrutinize, debate openly, make statements that offend, shock and disturb, and criticize belief systems, opinions and institutions, including religious ones, provided that they do not advocate hatred that incites hostility, discrimination or violence. The Special Rapporteur thus reiterates his call to all States to repeal anti-blasphemy laws and to initiate legislative and other reforms that protect the rights of individuals in accordance with international human rights standards."2

On 5th November 1982, a 21 year old Muslim male called Janis Khan participated in an underground "Islamic marriage ceremony" with a 14 year old girl. The legal documentation relating to this case states that under Islamic law, a Muslim girl may marry without her parents' consent at the age of 12. After the marriage ceremony, Khan stayed in London with his child bride until 21st December 1983, when the girl's father tracked them down and "forcibly removed" the girl. Khan was charged with abduction under Section 20 of the Sexual Offences Act 1956 and with sexual intercourse with an underage girl contrary to Section 6 (1) of the 1956 Act.

Khan took his case to the European courts, claiming that "he had been prevented from manifesting his religion through his Islamic marriage by the operation of the legislation which makes it an offence to have sexual intercourse with a girl under the age of 16." It was found that Khan's "Islamic marriage" was invalid, and it was indeed illegal for a grown man to have sexual intercourse with an underage girl, therefore Khan had been rightly banged up by the British authorities.3

So certain behaviour recommended by Islam has been found to be illegal, both at domestic and international level. And the religious beliefs that drove Mr. Khan to commit illegal acts may be examined robustly, as the UN Special Rapporteur has put it. What is more, those Islamic beliefs may be harshly criticized. Muslims may be offended, shocked or disturbed by such criticism of their beliefs, but legally speaking, that is neither here nor there. Human beings are protected by human rights law, but religions - and that includes Islam - are not.

One of the fundamental beliefs of Islam is that the man Islam claims as its prophet is supposed to be the ideal man, and Islam also teaches that his actions must be emulated by Muslims around the world. The problem is that Mohammed is said to have married a six year old girl named Aisha, and to have consummated the marriage when she was just nine.

This is an historical fact that has been recorded by respected academic authors with absolutely impeccable backgrounds. William Montgomery Watt was a Professor of Arabic and Islamic Studies at Edinburgh University, and his biographies of Mohammed are recognised as authoritative in both the Western and Islamic worlds.4 Let us see what Professor Watt said about this episode in Mohammed's life:

As the legal precedent set by Khan vs. The United Kingdom clearly shows, anyone behaving in that manner today (even if they are acting according to their religious beliefs) would be committing acts that are illegal, and they would be sent to jail.

Anyone who lives in a civilised Western country will find that if they sexually abuse children, their actions will be the subject of robust examination, and they will be subjected to harsh criticism. And anyone guilty of such actions who attempts to defend themselves by saying they are merely practicing their religious beliefs will find that this is no defence.

Take Warren Jeffs for example, the man labelled in the press as a "paedophile preacher" This was a man in his 50s who was believed to be a prophet by his followers. Jeffs had married several adult women in the course of his life (he was said to have had 78 wives) and in addition to those relationships with grown women, Jeffs displayed a sexual interest in underage girls. The Texan authorities even had a recording of Jeffs sexually assaulting a 12 year old girl. Jeffs objected to the recording being played at his trial because, he asserted, the recording was protected by religious privacy rights. The judge overruled him, the tape was played, and Jeffs was found guilty of two counts of sexual assault and sent down for 20 years. 5

Under Texas law, 12 and 15-year-old girls are not old enough to consent to engage in sexual activities. Any sexual activity between an adult and an under-17-year-old is a sexual assault even if the minor is a willing participant. The same activity with an under-14-year-old is aggravated sexual assault punishable by up to life in prison.6

In Britain , the singer of the rock band Lostprophets, Ian Watkins, was recently jailed for committing sex crimes against children. The judge at his trial said he was a "determined and committed paedophile" and "a deeply corrupting influence" on others. Two adult women were jailed as his accomplices, and his 38 year old former girlfriend has alleged that Watkins, who had reportedly dated a string of attractive (adult) women, had developed an interest in having sex with children 4 years earlier.7

Everyone who has been brought up to view the world through a Judeo-Christian moral framework understands that having sex with little girls is not only illegal, it is immoral. And everyone who understands the difference between good and evil (and who has not chosen to serve evil) would harshly criticize the behaviour, and the beliefs, of people like the "lost" prophet Ian Watkins and the "Mormon" prophet Warren Jeffs.

In spite of all this, the Austrian authorities have seen fit to prosecute a citizen called Elisabeth Sabaditch-Wolff because she criticised the Islamic "prophet" Mohammed for having sex with a 9 year old girl. As the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion or expression has made very clear, she has the right to do so. The Special Rapporteur has also made it clear that religious doctrines and practices are not protected by human rights law. All religious beliefs, and that includes Islamic beliefs, are open to robust examination, and they may be harshly criticised. And as we have seen, anyone with a functioning moral compass will criticise those particular Islamic beliefs and practices, regardless of the supposed "prophethood" of the perpetrator.

And the people who prosecuted Elisabeth Sabaditch-Wolff know that. We have to acknowledge that the pseudo-religion Islam and its false "prophet" are not more than pawns on a cosmic chessboard, and the faceless bureaucrats and cloak-wearing disciples of the empty philosophy of multiculturalism are nothing but willing vessels who have given themselves over completely to evil. The pronouncements they make which form the philosophy they want to inflict upon the world, whatever the cost, are false, irrational, illegal and immoral. The multicultural fantasy they say they are dedicated to bringing about is a logical impossibility that has never existed, and never will. If any of the multi-cultists doubt the truth of that assertion, all they need to do to test it is fly out to Saudi Arabia during the Hajj and walk the streets declaring their atheism loudly to all and sundry. They won't do that though, and we all know why.

The truth is the multi-cultists who preach tolerance and understanding have none. They claim to be trying to create a new world order (if only the benighted masses would just understand how the final solution is supposed to work, damn them!) but in reality, all they are able to do is destroy the world around them.

We don't have to worry about some new Stalin or Hitler arriving on the world scene, although that may very well happen. What we need to concern ourselves with, right here and right now, are the faceless, the empty, the nothings who have learned how to weld themselves on to the machinery of the state, and are now impossible to remove. These beings have nothing in their lives but their little claims to power and the evil philosophy that drives the machinery they are now part of. They will sacrifice anyone and anything rather than give their lies up, because they can't face the howling emptiness that lurks at the heart of their pathetic existence. Their fear drives them to attack anyone and anything around them.

It's too late to do anything about this. We're just going to have to accept that evil has always been abroad in this world we live in, and this age is no different.

There are dark times ahead, mark my words.


1. La Rue, F. Promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, UN General Assembly, 67th Session, A/67/357, September 7th 2012, paragraph 36, available at: http://www.ohchr.org/en/HRBodies/SP/Pages/GA67session.aspx accessed 18/09/2013.
2. ibid., paragraph 53.
3. Janis Khan v. The United Kingdom, Application No. 11579/85.
4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Montgomery_Watt (accessed 22/12/2103)
5. Bentley, P. Warren Jeffs sentenced to life plus 20 years in prison as picture emerges of 50 brides, bred to worship the polygamous 'prophet', Daily Mail, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2024150/Warren-Jeffs-trial-Paedophile-gets-life-sentence-50-brides-photo-emerges.html (accessed 22/12/2013);
 McQueeney, K. I cried so much during my wedding my dress was soaked: Horrifying ordeal of Warren Jeffs' child bride 'forced to marry her cousin', Daily Mail, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2040428/Warren-Jeffss-child-bride-I-cried-wedding-dress-soaked.html (accessed 22/12/2013);
'Give away children's toys and don't have sex with your wives': Paedophile preacher Warren Jeffs re-writes rulebook for followers from prison, Daily Mail, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2074893/Warren-Jeffs--paedophile-preacher-writes-rulebook-sect-followers-prison.html (accessed 22/12/2013).
6. Richey, W. Prophet to pedophile: Polygamist Warren Jeffs sentenced to life in prison, The Christian Science Monitor, http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2011/0809/Prophet-to-pedophile-Polygamist-Warren-Jeffs-sentenced-to-life-in-prison (accessed 22/12/2013).
7. Best, J. Ian Watkins sentencing: Former Lostprophets frontman sentenced to 35 years for 'depraved' child sex crimes, Daily Mirror, December 18th 2013, http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ian-watkins-jailed-former-lostprophets-2939767 (accessed 23/12/2013);
Aspinall, A. Ian Watkins: Ex-girlfriend warned cops FOUR years ago that he was a paedophile after Lostprophets singer made sick confession, Daily Mirror, November 26th 2013, http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ian-watkins-ex-girlfriend-warned-cops-2854744(accessed 23/12/2013;
Aspinall, A. Ian Watkins sentence is 'too little, too late' says whistleblower Joanna Majic who warned police FOUR years ago, Daily Mirror, December 18th 2013, http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ian-watkins-sentence-joanna-majic-2941107(accessed 23/12/2013).

Tags: Islam, human rights, Warren Jeffs, Mohammed, Special Rapporteur, United Nations To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Patriot's Corner. Thanks!

1 Comments - Share Yours!:

PatriotUSA said...

Well stated and sharing over at CBC.