Leaving Islam



Yamin Zakaria vs. Ali Sina 

Part II Page 3

Back  <       >    Next 


c)                  You then go on to say “Almost anything is better than Islam”. So surely you must have a set of values to judge Islam by otherwise it is empty rhetoric typical of a bigot, blinded by hate. To classify something as evil or good you need define and elaborate your criteria of assessing good and evil. Something is not evil simply because you say so! 

You refer to the crimes of the Second World War. By your criterion of letting people to choose freely, there should be no objection if they chose the likes of Hitler again! So what exactly are you espousing Mr Sina? Again does this not show you are indeed a confused man or a woman?  Or is that your position on “logic and truth”! Please elaborate on the above points explain what you exactly mean. 


No, something is not good or evil simply because I say it or because Muhammad says it. Good and evil must be measured according to a defined criterion. My criterion is the Golden Rule. This is a self evident criterion. It works like an inner compass for all human beings who are endowed with commonsense. In Islam this criterion is rejected. Good and bad are not manifest on their own. They are established by what Muhammad ordered and prohibited. What he ordered or prohibited could be contrary to the Golden Rule. But his words are the standard. Muslims have no regards for the Golden Rule.  

The Golden Rule says do to others what you would expect others do to you. This is very simple and easy to understand and apply. I do not like to be cheated, so I must not cheat others. I do not like to be killed, so I must not kill others. I do not want anyone rape my wife, so I must not rape others. This principle works like a Swiss clock. It never fails. You can find all the guidance you need by this compass.  

But the Golden Rule has no place in Islam. Muhammad told his followers to fight the unbelievers and impose on them his religion. How do you like the Jews, the Christians or the Hindus fight the Muslims and impose their religion on them? Muhammad raided civilian towns, killed unarmed men, looted their belongings and enslaved and raped their wives. How do you like this to be done to you and your family?

Let me quote some of the verses of the Quran switching the words “Muslims” and “non-Muslims”. Let us see how they sound.  

8:12 We will cast terror into the hearts of Muslims. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.  

3:28, Let not the non-Muslims take for friends or helpers the Muslims.  

8:65, Rouse the non-Muslims to the fight against Muslims.

9:5Then fight and slay the Muslims wherever ye find them,

9:14, Fight the Muslims, and God will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame.

9:23, O ye the non-Muslims take not for protectors your fathers and your brothers if they love Islam.

9:28, O ye the non-Muslims! Truly the Muslims are unclean.

9:123, O ye non-Muslims! fight the Muslims who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you.

47:4, Therefore, when ye meet the Muslims, smite at their necks; At length.  

How do you like them? I bet you don’t like them.  

That is why Islam is contrary to the Golden Rule. That is why Islam is dangerous and evil in its core. That is why we must strive and eradicate this ideology of hate to assure mankind is safe and human lives are not sacrificed. So as you see there is no contradiction between promoting democracy and freedom of thought and eradicating Islam, Nazism, fascism or any other hatemongering and divisive ideology.  


d)              You then state:  

“However, I made a search with your name and read a few passages of your articles and gave up on that illusion very soon. I am afraid your heart is filled with Islamic hate and you have no regards for truth, fairness, love and mankind.”  

It is difficult fathom why you want to engage in a debate with me and yet you confess that you do not want read my views as you say “read few passages of your articles and gave up”! It appears to me that you have made up your mind even before engaging in the debate. Is that how you intend to debate? Please clarify this important point. Furthermore, you pass judgments (“Islamic hate”, “truth”, “love”, “twisted sense of morality”) on me without elaborating on what those terms mean by referring to my articles but of course you cannot because you have not read them! Is this not a clear evidence of blind-fanaticism of the type espoused by the likes of Hitler? 

You claim my “twisted sense of morality” with no examples or elaboration but then why don’t you state and define your so-called “morality”. There is no need to be shy! We want to get a glimpse of the religion according to Prophet (or read as Profit) Ali Sina after we leave Islam. So, please elaborate on your morality and we will be looking forward to seeing this. 

But wait - According to your earlier stated criteria, truth, hate morality are all subjective as you said let people decide freely! So now what ABSOLUTE ‘morals’ are you HYPOCRITCALLY trying to lecture me with? This all sounds like a position of someone talking from a position of “belief and irrationality” standing on “very shaky ground of faith and conjecture”.


 Mr. Zakaria, let me remind you again that it is you who approached me and declared your readiness to debate with me. So your question, “why you want to engage in debate with me”, is moot. As for reading your articles, I read enough to see where you come from and what you say. Whether you like it or not you belong to a very well defined pigeonhole. Sure we will discuss all your views and I will show why I believe you have a very twisted sense of morality. One example of that is in the above verses. You have no problem reading those verses as they appear in the Quran and you would defend them. But certainly you feel very much uncomfortable if the places of Muslims and non-Muslims are switched. But there are more examples that I found in your articles.  

 You want me to explain to you what morality is. I think I already did that. It is  the application of the the Golden Rule. But morality is not relative at all. The Golden Rule is absolute and so the morality derived from it. It is Islam that teaches moral relativism. Rape is bad but rape of the disbelievers is good. Murder is bad but Murder of kafirs is divine. Child molestation is bad but if Muhammad lusts after a 9-year-old child that is good. If a non-Muslim kills a Muslim he should be put to death but no Muslim should be killed for killing a non-Muslim. A married man may lust after other woman and marry four wives but this rule does not apply to women. Islam is a moral relativistic doctrine.

Back  <       >    Next 

Back to Index 






Articles Op-ed Authors Debates Leaving Islam FAQ
Comments Library Gallery Video Clips Books Sina's Challenge

  ©  copyright You may translate and publish the articles in this site only if you provide a link to the original page.