Update on Abdul Rahman

Rahman remains in custody as the Afghan government tries to weasel out of the sticky wicket it placed itself in by trying to prosecute and execute a person who was formerly a Muslim but converted to Christianity 16 years ago.

Michelle Malkin has more.

UPDATE:
Afghan clerics want Rahman dead no matter how the court rules. Nice. Real nice.

But four senior clerics interviewed by The Associated Press in their mosques in Kabul said Rahman deserved to be killed for his conversion.

"He is not crazy. He went in front of the media and confessed to being a Christian," said Hamidullah, chief cleric at Haji Yacob Mosque.

"The government is scared of the international community. But the people will kill him if he is freed."

"He is not mad. The government are playing games. The people will not be fooled," said Abdul Raoulf, cleric at Herati Mosque. "This is humiliating for Islam. ... Cut off his head."

Raoulf is considered a moderate cleric in Afghanistan. He was jailed three times for criticizing the Taliban's policies before the hardline regime was ousted by U.S.-led forces in 2001.

Considering that the Taliban were as extreme as it gets when it comes to imposing Islamic law, anyone could be considered moderate in comparison.

And why would it be considered humiliating for Islam? Is Islam as a religion not strong enough to withstand the conversion of an adherent to another religion? Does it not speak more to the religious views, strengths and weaknesses of Rahman than it does the religion?

For a Muslim religious leader to proclaim that this act of conversion is a humiliation for Islam suggests that the imams are insecure about their religious beliefs and instead must rely on force and intimidation to carry on their religious traditions. One cannot disagree with the dogma handed down by the imams or else face a potential death sentence.

UPDATE:
Others blogging this deadly serious story: Astute Blogger, In the Bullpen, Captain's Quarters, Below the Beltway, California Conservative, Stop the ACLU.

Some critics remind us that this is the government that the Afghan people chose for themselves and/or that the Adminstration lied about the nature of the Afghan constitution. This is absolutely correct on the former, but incorrect on the latter. The Afghan people did choose this style of government and the constitution that calls for this potential outcome (executing apostates). However, there were serious criticisms of the Afghan constitution (and the Iraqi constitution) over the protections and freedoms that Americans take for granted as references to Shari'a and freedom of religion are proving to be incompatible. These criticisms came from places like LGF, Captain's Quarters, and even on the Iraq the Model site.

Yet, none of this means that we should sit idly by while the Afghan government goes through with the trial and execution. Sitting idly by while this happens is tantamount to condoning such behavior.

Thankfully, we're already seeing various countries, including the US and Canada, trying to exert pressure and engage the Afghan government in discussion on how to avoid executing Rahman (not to mention finding a way to save face for the government).

UPDATE:
LGF notes that Reuters ran a stealth rewrite on an article it ran earlier in the day, which originally found the cartoon jihad and the Rahman situation to be mirror images of each other. The new version now says that the two are complete different. Gotta admire the editorial board at Reuters picking that one up.

Technorati: abdul rahman, islam, conversion, apostacy, afghanistan.