Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ive
Maybe I'm just running bad but 98% of people who 'criticize Islam' just get basic things incorrect. That last clip is no exception with the poet-murder business.
It's obviously important to point out that radical dudes actually believe Mohammad was running out around killing poets, even if he wasn't, and feel they should do the same, or that Mohammad didn't want people to draw him and they should kill people that do, even though he didn't give a ****. But that's still separate from 'criticizing Islam' and it really seems at this point people are accidentally but totally on purpose fudging the specifics to justify some easy criticism.
What? What in your view was the reason that al-Ashraf was killed?
It's true that "because he wrote poems" is simplified to the point of obscurantism, but essentially it was murder of a political opponent. One of the core problems with Islam is the lack of distinction between the political and the religious. The killing of al-Ashraf is Exhibit A in that regard. From one of the accounts of the event in the Sahih Bukhari:
Quote:
"Narrated Jabir Abdullah: "Allah's messenger said "Who is willing to kill Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His apostle?"
My question to you: what do you think Muhammad meant here by "hurt Allah"? What actions of al-Ashraf does he refer to?
There are many other instances of Muhammad having people killed for saying things he didn't like, although none as well-attested as the killing of al-Ashraf. If your point is that Muhammad probably would not have approved of the Charlie Hebdo killings, for instance, then I agree. But it seems very likely if not absolutely certain that he was quite willing to have people murdered purely because they opposed him politically.