Search This Blog

Tuesday, 15 November 2011

Believers or “believers”?

“I had a very difficult time following a so-called religion whose founder and followers had butchered my ancestors, raped and sold our women, burned our libraries, and destroyed our magnificent culture. Islam was forced down the throats of Iranians with the sword of Allah. In my heart, I never considered myself a Muslim. However, I didn’t reveal this until later in life for fear of retribution by radical Muslims.”

Thus writes Amil Imani in International Analyst Network.

What makes this statement more remarkable is that he was brought up in an Islamic family. “I never embraced Islam in the first place, although I was born and raised in a Muslim family,” he writes.

He has a go at sharia law, saying, “Sharia law stipulates that any Muslim who turns his back on Islam should be given a chance to revert to the faith. For an unrepentant male apostate, death is the proscribed punishment and life imprisonment for the female apostate.”

And this points up the sheer illogicality of it all. How can you force someone to believe something? They either believe or don’t. Belief is not a voluntary action: it’s entirely involuntary, like your heartbeat.

It also insults the religion, if these bozos who insist on blind faith could only see it. If someone is being coerced into “revert[ing] to the faith”, they will outwardly embrace the tenets without believing in them. They’ll never be able to tell anyone, for fear of punishment. But the fact remains: they are pretending to believe. So how many Muslims – and those of other belief systems where coercion is a factor – are thought to believe in their hocus-pocus while not doing so?

Far better, surely, to have a believer who is literally that, rather than a “believer” you have to put quote marks around.

And all of this prompts the question: how many true believers are there? As many as they like to claim? Obviously not, if many of them are “believers” under duress.


Kentexman said...


You make some really great points, and I really can identify with Amil.

I too was brought up in a Christian home, and it was the "right" thing to do in going to church, to sing the songs, and to play the facade of religion.

However, as I became an adult, I rejected my Christian upbringing, and I became someone who enjoyed a myriad of different experiences. But the story doesn't end there...

After having filled 20 years of my life with money, various sexual actions, and alcohol, - didn't hit the drugs as I as scared of them - I was still empty. I was not satisfied. The more money I wasn't enough. The more sex I had with various wasn't enough. The more I wasn't enough.

Only after seeing the radical transformation in another life of someone who shared with similar hurts and problems did I realize that I could have peace and joy that surpasses all understanding. And I didn't have to go far.

There was nothing wrong with the upbringing that I had. I simply did not want to surrender control of my life and my selfish desires to someone else. However, the moment that I did that, my life radically changed. It's not that I'm perfect now, but I'm getting better every day.

I no longer find joy in the behaviors and the things that I used to indulge. I now find joy in someone who loves me like no one else could.

Thanks again for your post!


Diesel B said...

Amil is both erudite and courageous. If only more Muslims, or rather, "Muslims" would come out and express their doubts. I know it's a dangerous business, as even in Britain, so-called apostates, or even believers who marry the "wrong sort of Muslim" can have their throats cut on a crowded seaside promenade, or be chopped into pieces, stuffed in a suitcase and thrown in the canal. And where does Amil's commonsense viewpoint leave that socialist plonker who runs the "" website? Is Amil an "anti-Muslim racist" as well - or is he just a rational human being?