Author Topic: Slowly our MP's are becoming aware  (Read 1270 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline muppet

  • Full JTFer
  • ***
  • Posts: 180
Slowly our MP's are becoming aware
« on: May 15, 2009, 06:25:33 PM »
I realise that many of the MP's in the Australian Parliament are well aware of the barbarity of the death cult but unfortunately and so sadly they remain in silence. One MP Luke Simpkins is raising his voice in regards to one part of Islam, apostasy.

Date Monday, 16 March 2009 Source House
Page 2817 Proof No
Questioner Responder
Speaker Simpkins, Luke, MP

Mr SIMPKINS (Cowan) (8.50 pm)—I was recently
handed the magazine of the Barnabas Fund, Barnabas
Aid, which supports hope and aid for the persecuted
church. I was fascinated to read of an issue of great
importance to me and a great many people in Cowan.
The issue is apostasy, which in this case is where
a Muslim converts to Christianity and faces extreme
consequences that in various countries include murder,
imprisonment, harassment, beatings, torture, rape and
a wide range of other persecution undertaken either
as a legally sanctioned punishment or by family or
others in the community who believe that their actions
are justified under the scriptures.
This issue is about
religious intolerance, and this is the grievance I wish
to speak to.

To begin with, I would like to speak briefly about the
petition to this place being advanced by the Barnabas
Fund. The petition calls on the House to support
efforts by Muslims to have the apostasy law reformed
and for the House to encourage other governments to
pursue abolition of the offence and of punishments for
apostasy. I encourage the Barnabas Fund to continue
to highlight this important issue and progress their
petition. It is neither right nor legitimate for any
religion to justify threats against and punishments and
persecutions of those who choose to leave one religion
for another. In my view it is clear that such a position
of persecution of dissidents is wrong and should
be opposed. Furthermore, any religion that promotes
or justifies the persecution of apostates cannot be
considered true or genuine.
Sadly, it appears that only in 2007 in Norway
did a nationally representative Muslim organisation
affirm the right to convert from one faith to another
without fear of harassment or violence. This is not
reassuring, and I wonder where the leadership is
on this matter here in Australia. By that I mean:
what is the Islamic leadership’s position on such
matters? Surely condemnation of such barbarism can
be expected. Of course, the actions of a few can always
be dismissed as misinterpretation of the scriptures, so I
will just speak briefly of that. Such misinterpretations
could be quickly cleared up by unequivocal public
statements by the leadership. It would be great to see
public condemnation of the ill-treatment of converts to
Christianity. It would be great to hear of clear public
statements that the Koran does not justify or condone
any ill-treatment of converts. It does not seem that there
have been any such statements, and I wonder what the
silence really means.
It is unclear whether it is a lack
of will or it is just not possible.
I say this because, under sharia’s five main schools,
death sentences are prescribed for men. This is correct,
because it is required under the four Sunni options
—Hanafi, Shafi’i, Maliki and Hanbali—and is also
prescribed under the Shia Jafari school of sharia. It
seems that the differences in each school revolve
around the time allowed to repent, whether the apostasy
needs to be spoken, the manner in which it is spoken,
the number of witnesses et cetera. The punishment for
women is death in most cases, but under the Hanafi
school it is imprisonment until the woman repents.
Under the Shia version she can be imprisoned and
beaten with rods until she repents or dies. I struggle
to identify evidence of a civilised or tolerant religion
when these are the only possible outcomes prescribed
under sharia.
I would now like to draw on some examples of
the application of the Islamic attitude to those who
turn away from Islam to Christianity. Firstly, in Saudi
Arabia, we have the case of Fatima al-Mutairi, who
became a Christian after discovering Jesus on the
internet. Her brother cut out her tongue and burnt her
to death.
Saudi law allows execution as punishment,
but, because her brother did it, a lenient sentence seems
likely. I understand that some of her family’s pride
has been restored because she was murdered by her
brother. This is nothing short of barbaric. Sudan also
has the death penalty for apostasy, or converting, from
Islam. In Iran in recent years apostates have been
murdered or beaten to death. On 2 September last
year, provisional approval was granted by the Iranian
parliament for the establishment of the death penalty
for apostates, where before judges had used other
laws to justify the death penalty for men and lifelong
imprisonment for women.

I find there are two problems with the continuation
of medieval laws. One is the very fact that the death
penalty can be imposed in many countries around the
world, especially considering the rationale behind it
being religious preference. This by itself is outrageous
enough, but to allow the continuation of it represents
a terrible influence on Muslims who can then use that
very law or even text from a holy book as an excuse for
persecution, harassment or even murder. These actions
taken against converts to Christianity have even been
taken by family members. The reality of this is that
there are deep matters at the core of the problem.
These are deep problems at the core of a religion that
many of us find incomprehensible and, in many ways,
reprehensible. I say these things at the risk of being
branded an Islamophobe, a term designed to repress
free speech and alternative views.
The subjugation of
women, arranged marriages and even punishment by
rape have been reported and justified under Islam.
These are not consistent with Western attitudes.
Why then, in contrast, are converts to Islam
celebrated in the West as evidence of great tolerance?
Those who convert away from Islam to Christianity
are not similarly supported or protected. In the United
Kingdom, the government and some parts of their
society have gone out of their way to demonstrate their
fair treatment and acceptance of Islamic people by
such celebrations of Muslim converts and by allowing
limited sharia law. This sometimes gives me cause
to wonder, in the case of Muslims converting to
Christianity, if this is some source of embarrassment
for those who seek to demonstrate their lack of bias
against Muslims.
What concerns me is that in the United Kingdom
and perhaps elsewhere governments have, in their
attempts to demonstrate equality and fairness, provided
additional rights or promotions to Muslims rather than
just ensured that they have no fewer rights than anyone
else in society. The greatest example of this remains
the introduction of sharia law. Regardless of it being
limited or unlimited, it is an additional right given to
a narrow section of the community and it is wrong.
Any attempt to introduce it in Australia in any capacity
and in any location should be rejected and vigorously

People in Cowan raise these matters with me
frequently—it is almost surprising how frequently—
and this demonstrates to me that the subject is of
great concern to a lot of my constituents. However,
when they raise it with me, I always say to them
the following: Australia is a very tolerant country. If
someone wants to come here and work to provide for
their family and they have respect for the values and
institutions of our society then it does not matter about
the colour of their skin or their choice of religion; we
welcome them.
The opposite of this is where someone
wants to come here and impose different institutions or
values on Australia; then I say they are not welcome.
Sharia law is exactly such an example, and I join with
the majority of Australians in rejecting any attempt
to establish it here. From the examples of the Islamic
approach to converts away from the Muslim faith in
almost every place in the world, this system of religion
based law is inconsistent with our values and the
institutions of Australian society. This truth remains
self-evident now and forever more.

This is the saddest part, I say these things at the risk of being
branded an Islamophobe, a term designed to repress
free speech and alternative views.
and THIS happens all too often here!