So, Rahman is “seeking asylum”– in lieu of an asylum, I guess — according to news reports. It’s surely likely he’ll return to Germany, but if not it is to be hoped the United States would also welcome him.

It does put me in mind of the quote from the Afghan cleric Said Mirhossain Nasri a few days ago, when he thoughtfully observed:

“If he is allowed to live in the West, then others will claim to be Christian so they can too,” he said. “We must set an example. … He must be hanged.”

Will there be a rush on Christianity in Afghanistan, the better to get a fast ticket out? I don’t think so, somehow, but there will be repeat cases, genuine or not. That’s why there had better be big wheels turning to find a way of explaining the concept of religious freedom to a judiciary — not to mention a populace — that genuinely understands it only as the freedom to be Muslim. The fire fighter who asked President Bush last week if we needed to send “an army of sociologists” over there was, I think, expressing the frustrations of many who feel they’re waking up to realize that what they thought to be their irresistable goodwill has collided with an immovable object.

Mark Steyn is on the ball as usual:

In his book Islam And The West, Bernard Lewis writes, “The primary duty of the Muslim as set forth not once but many times in the Koran is ‘to command good and forbid evil.’ It is not enough to do good and refrain from evil as a personal choice. It is incumbent upon Muslims also to command and forbid.”

Or as the shrewd Canadian columnist David Warren put it: “We take it for granted that it is wrong to kill someone for his religious beliefs. Whereas Islam holds it is wrong not to kill him.” In that sense, those blood-curdling imams are right, and Karzai’s attempts to finesse the issue are, sharia-wise, wrong.

I can understand why the president and the secretary of state would rather deal with this through back-channels, private assurances from their Afghan counterparts, etc. But the public rhetoric is critical, too. At some point we have to face down a culture in which not only the mob in the street but the highest judges and academics talk like crazies.

Rahman embodies the question at the heart of this struggle: If Islam is a religion one can only convert to not from, then in the long run it is a threat to every free person on the planet.

…

Addendum 5:27 p.m.: From ABC News there is a piece on what they call the secret world of Afghan Christians:

One man, who serves as a local pastor, says converts in Afghanistan know they face the gravest consequences if caught.

“We live in constant fear,” he said. “Everyone is afraid.”

Many even have to hide their adopted faith from their families. That was what got Rahman in trouble, say other Christians who knew him. His relatives turned him in after he read the Bible to his two daughters.

Christians had been hopeful the U.S.-backed government would make life easier, but so far it hasn’t helped much.

“President Karzai has no power to help us. He is just like a symbol,” the pastor said.

Another Christian, whose house was raided four months ago by police looking for his Bible, feels lucky they never located evidence of his adopted faith.

He says the United States needs to do more to ensure basic freedoms are enshrined in the new Afghanistan.

“I am thankful to the U.S. for removing the Taliban monsters,” he said, “but it is America’s responsibility to bring real democracy here.”

Well, that last man’s desperation and desire is understandable, but he’s also wrong about whose ultimate responsibility it is to create real democracy in Afghanistan.

...................
Share this!

Posts which might be related to this one based on a mysterious algorithm:

• ’Cause I Believe in You
• Pressure
• Going, Going, Gone