If you thought Ehteshaam's debates were bad, check out his YouTube videos!
Farhan Qureshi was raised as an Ahmadi Muslim. He later left this sect in favor of orthodox Islam. Muslims responded: "What a strong-minded individual! He was willing to go where the evidence pointed, even if it meant abandoning his community! Brave and noble man!"
Now Farhan has left Islam altogether. The Muslim response? "What a weak-minded fool! He must have been brainwashed by Islamophobic bigots like Nabeel Qureshi and David Wood! Sniveling coward!"
So if Farhan leaves a sect of Islam, it's a sign of strength. If he leaves the Islamic religion, it's a sign of weakness.
Here's the problem with these inconsistent Muslim responses. When Farhan left the Ahmadi sect, he explained his reasons for leaving. These reasons are either (a) good reasons, or (b) bad reasons. Similarly, when Farhan left Islam, he explained his reasons for leaving. These reasons are either (a) good reasons, or (b) bad reasons.
It's quite possible for someone to abandon one position for good reasons, and to leave another position for bad reasons. For instance, if an Ahmadi Muslim recognizes the clear inconsistencies between Muhammad's teachings and Mirza Gulam Ahmad's teachings, such a Muslim might leave the Ahmadi sect for good reasons. But a person can also leave a false position for bad reasons. For example, if someone says, "I left Islam because I wanted to eat pork," I wouldn't consider this a good reason for leaving Islam.
The question, then, is whether Farhan had good reasons for leaving Islam. If he didn't have good reasons, Muslims like Ehteshaam should be exposing Farhan in public debate. If, on the other hand, they can't refute Farhan's evidence, calling him "weak" in horrible YouTube videos just isn't going to cut it.