"With all the radiance of a saint"

Very interesting article from Investor's Business Daily. It is called The Passion Of Abdul Rahman and here are some excerpts:

A prosecutor then told Western reporters that sharia law, which grips the judiciary even in post-liberation Afghanistan, demands the death penalty.

It's not hard to understand the worldwide repercussions. For this, Americans ask, we spent our blood and treasure? Why overthrow the intolerant Taliban only to replace it with a regime that practices such a medieval abomination?

The terrible injustice sent an arrow to the heart of U.S. foreign policy. President Bush has painstakingly spelled out a doctrine meant to universalize human freedom. Hamid Karzai, Afghanistan's elected president, has acted as a loyal ally. Now this.

It's easy to characterize either man as caught in a kind of Pontius Pilate dilemma, weighing reasons of state against man's obedience to God, finally washing his hands of the matter. Reassuringly, Bush's first impulse, articulated Wednesday to an audience in Wheeling, W.Va., was to express how troubled he was by the prospect of his co-religionist's execution.

The agony may be even more acute for Karzai, a reformist leader in a backward country, who has to convey allied pressure to his out-of-control judiciary.

Zealous Afghan prosecutors apparently want to exploit a fatal ambiguity in the country's new constitution: While embracing religious freedom, it proclaims itself an exclusively Islamic state, in which "obedience to God" can mean hanging apostates.

Rahman, showing not the slightest interest in realpolitik, has with all the radiance of a saint declared himself a willing martyr. The radiance captured the instant attention of human rights activists, of the governments of Italy and Germany, indeed of NATO itself, all of whom protested the planned execution.

And:

Still, there remains the pesky, existential matter of Abdul Rahman's life, which no Christian leader would want to see extinguished. And we should not settle for a despotic dispensation in which religious dissenters are branded "insane." Bush hesitated not a moment in resorting to first principles, around which our foreign policy must always be crafted.

Bush's predecessor was presented another profoundly moral question by another unlikely individual. Six-year-old Elian Gonzalez's mother drowned trying to deliver him to the land of the free. Cuban dictator Fidel Castro demanded the child's return. Without a thought, Bill Clinton set in motion the federal apparatus, consigning Elian to death-in-life on Castro's totalitarian island.

Clinton's dark decision came naturally to a political leader who holds that interests of state supersede individual freedom. The ex-president tasked Attorney General Janet Reno to seize Elian by force from his loving cousin's arms. The current president instructed Rice to appeal directly to Karzai.

From Clinton to Bush, that's 180 degrees of progress. With our abiding interest and guidance, Afghanistan, we may hope, will chart similar advancement.

More links and my previous posts here.

Michelle Malkin has a link to Mark Steyn's column.

Here is an excerpt from Steyn:

Fate conspires to remind us what this war is really about: civilizational confidence. And so history repeats itself: first the farce of the Danish cartoons, and now the tragedy - a man on trial for his life in post-Taliban Afghanistan because he has committed the crime of converting to Christianity.

The cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad were deeply offensive to Muslims, and so thousands protested around the world in the usual restrained manner - rioting, torching, killing, etc.

The impending execution of Abdul Rahman for embracing Christianity is, of course, offensive to Westerners, and so around the world we reacted equally violently by issuing blood-curdling threats like that made by State Department spokesman Sean McCormack: "Freedom of worship is an important element of any democracy," he said. "And these are issues as Afghan democracy matures that they are going to have to deal with increasingly."

Here is Amnesty International's response:

"No individual should ever be persecuted -- let alone executed -- for his or her religious beliefs. The freedom to practice one's own faith without fear of retribution is one of humanity's most sacred rights. If Rahman has been imprisoned solely because he converted to Christianity, he must be immediately and unconditionally released. Afghanistan has come a long way in terms of respecting and codifying human rights principles, but it must commit itself anew to judicial reform and the upholding of international standards."

From Spiegel Online:

Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai has confirmed that Abdul Rahman will not be executed for converting from Islam to Christianity. That's good news not just for Rahman himself, but also for relations between the West and the Islamic world.
---
During a telephone conversation with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Afghan President Hamid Karzai ruled out the possibility of execution and said that Rahman's life was not in danger. Harper announced the news during a press conference in Ottawa on Thursday.

"He (Karzai) certainly conveyed to me that we don't have to worry about any such eventual outcome. He had already spoken prior to my call to the attorney-general of Afghanistan about dealing with the situation," Harper told reporters. "President Karzai has assured me that what's alarmed most of us will be worked out quickly," he added.

The IDIOTS over at Huff Puff blame the GOP for this:

The right-wingers whipping themselves into a frenzy over Abdul Rahman's death sentence think they have an issue that can distract the country from their government's incompetence. Guess again. The ghastly decision to kill a convert is the direct result of Republican incompetence, and it's likely to happen again - in Iraq.

Blaming non-extremist Muslims for the despotic laws of Afghanistan is like blaming blacks for being on low ground when Katrina struck.

The Libs always see nothing worth saving when it comes to Christians. If a Muslim were being held and facing execution for being a Muslim, the Libs would be homicide bombing all over the place. And "non-extremist Muslims"? Where would they be? If so called "non-extremist Muslims" are responsible for the laws of Afghanistan, then they certainly are to blame in this instance. People (even those in Louisiana) must take responsibility for themselves. Becoming a Christian is in no way the same as choosing to live below sea level. The rest of the column is completely ridiculous, as well.

The Sydney Morning Herald:

AUSTRALIAN Muslim leaders yesterday condemned moves in Afghanistan to execute a man who converted to Christianity.

The Australian Federation of Islamic Councils said the prosecution of Abdul Rahman in Afghanistan was "barbaric" and "un-Islamic".

Spokesman Haset Sali called on the Australian Government to see if the Afghan prosecutors could be charged with crimes against humanity unless the religious charges against Mr Rahman were dismissed.

"Such barbaric action by anyone seeking to quote Islam as supporting their criminal action needs to be dealt with as a crime against humanity," Mr Sali said.

He said the Koran stated there must be "no compulsion in religion".

"The prosecution of Mr Rahman, seeking the death penalty against him for converting to Christianity is reminiscent of the fascist era that caused the Second World War and the pointless death of 55 million people."

More as the news becomes available.