[muzzammil]

On Jihad and Jihadism: http://www.sunniforu...am-and-Violence

On the treatment of minorities under Islam and Christendom: http://www.loonwatch...han-dhimmitude/ [follow-ups: http://www.loonwatch...r-on-the-ropes/ and http://www.loonwatch...r-is-a-chicken/ and more to come]

On Apostasy: http://www.loonwatch...09/09/apostasy/

On the testimony of a rape victim: http://www.loonwatch...of-rape-victim/ [also: http://www.loonwatch.../anti-sex-laws/ and more to come]

[faqir]

salam
The Loonwatch site has some good material masha'Allah but I was wondering what you made of the one on apostasy?

[DefendingIslam]

Salam Alaykum,

I happened to read the loonwatch article on apostasy. Even though it has some good things (perhaps), the truth is that the author is jumbling up many things, taking evidences from Salafis like Ibn Baz, implying that Muslims need not follow a Madh-hab if they do not feel like it, saying that the issue of Naskh in the Qur'an is being used improperly, and also hinting that any layman can try to "reinterpret" the religion to suit the "needs of the age".

All in all, it is quite a modernist article, and the same reasoning could be used to call for the legalization of homosexuality, or taking of the Hijab, etc.

It is best if the article is shown to a proper scholar, who can then comment on these matters in the best possible way.

Wa Salam.

[muzzammil]

I don't think loonwatch is telling Muslims what opinions they should adopt or what orientation they should choose, but it attempts to demonstrate that by taking a cross-section of Muslim scholarly opinion, what the Islamophobes insinuate in very narrow and essentialist terms is false. For instance, the illa for killing an apostate is not agreed upon by the classical jurists. The Hanafis believed it was because of the threat they posed to the Islamic polity as the state was a religi-political order and religious loyalty more or less defined political loyalty; for this reason, Hanafis excluded women from the general rule of executing apostates. On the other hand, the Shafi'is believed it was because of their kufr that they are killed, not the threat they pose to the Islamic state. It is these nuances that are lost in Islamophobic writings. Based on the Hanafi ratio and the modern situation a good argument can be made that Muslim nations should not kill apostates, but of course that can be disputed. See: http://lamppostprodu...FOR%20FAITH.pdf

With the issue of naskh, there has been a lot of disagreement, and it is rare to find unanimity on a particular example of naskh. I think it's safe to say that in some cases it may have been used improperly or in excess; the example given in the apostasy article of 2:256 being abrogated, this is not the view of most classical scholars, who said 2:256 was muhkam in the case of those non-Muslims residing in Muslim lands (dhimmis and musta'mins); which is why the loonwatch article goes on to give other views besides the naskh one for this verse.

Responding to Islam-bashing can result in apologetics which is just as skewed, but I think generally loonwatch is fair in what it reports. I don't agree with the terms used like "reform-minded" (for scholars like Jamal Badawi, and even Abdal Hakim Murad, Hamza Yusuf and Zaid Shakir) and "conservative" (for scholars like Bin Baz, Mufti Muhammad ibn Adam and others), as they can be divisive and be easily misunderstood. I certainly do not think, however, that the site would promote views that advocate taking off the hijab or homosexuality or the like; it generally refers to scholars that have a genuine following in the Muslim world. Jamal Badawi, for example: we may not agree with him and his views on madhhabs, but there are many Muslims who follow him and the Fiqh Council of North America. Even if you don't agree with a lot of these scholars on this topic, they are numerous and representative of a growing view in the Muslim world: http://apostasyandislam.blogspot.com/

All in all, I think loonwatch is a good antidote to a lot of the Islamophobic writings and attitudes out there. In representing Muslim views it tries to be as fair as possible, but of course that means it cannot be sensitive to quite exclusivist Muslim attitudes.