Whenever “freedom of speech and thought” in the so-called Muslim world is discussed, it is always seen as a very debatable issue, assuming there is flexibility in Islam that could guarantee freedom of speech and thought. It is nothing but a wishful thinking and some gaps to be filled on a 24 hours media. In reality, all Abrahamic faiths and their teachings are antitheses to the assumption, including Islam.
Therefore, many Muslim apologists in the West and a handful of them in the Muslim world claim the compatibility of Islamic law with international Human Rights laws which is an absurd claim because some Muslim apologists divide the Muslim jurists (فقها) into two categories: Pre-modern Muslim jurists and Post-modern Muslim jurists. The Post-modern jurists (only a few to be found throughout Islamic history) believe that Islamic principles are “neither rigid nor stagnant and can in fact be applied in evolving situations.” In fact, this is nothing but a self-created method of bending Islamic principles as needed. As a matter of fact, there has been no serious debate on certain vital issues, such as Apostasy and Blasphemy, which makes Islam very incompatible with International Human Rights. Continue reading