What Ijmaa of the scholars? and as for your absurd statement
is Saalih Al-Munajjid a Prophet getting revelation from Allah? Is he not human who can make a mistake? Honestly what a stupid statement and for the record I do believe he is misguided in this issue.

Yeah....such as the bombing of Afghanistan, Iraq, support of the illegal Zionist state of so-called 'Israel' (may Allah destroy it) and the rest of the puppet Kaafir states, and recognition of same sex marriages, fornication/adultery, freedom to insult Allah, His Prophets (like Salman Rushdie did - may Allah give him a painful death) etc, and many other 'values'....yeah...why not vote for such upright values and principles....some people need to wake up.

Yeah we should sit back and not do anything, get rolled over and when Allah (SWT) questions us regarding what we did to prevent further attacks on our muslim brethern, we will say nothing, we had no voice in the country we lived, we didnt vote and put our points forward. Instead we lay down, and put none of our views across. You need to stand up or you arent heard, we need push these politicians and hold them to there word of what they say, when it comes to dealing with issues close to the muslims. I go with the majority of the scholars and common sense, which says vote.

I find this quite amusing, since you were the one throwing his fatwas at me before when I was only quoting Qur'an and Hadith, and now you turn around and call him misguided!

And I don't know how you can say he is misguided on this issue since the same ruling has been given by multiple committees of scholars around the world. This is definitely the Ijmaa' because you can't even show me ONE reliable scholar who states otherwise!

You need to wake up, because Muslims aren't going to vote for these things, they'll vote against them!

Again, you've proven my point. If we stay silent like you suggest, all the evil you've listed above will happen. But if we take action, by voting, we can prevent this from happening, and allow an Islamic influence on these countries,

sonofadam you never answered my question
WHO is behind that site?

You got one candidate A supporting gays, but does not want to kill Muslims, no occupation etc.

Another candidate B is against gays, abortion etc., but is in favour of killing Muslims and occupation.

If you don't vote A, then candidate B will get in power.

What do you do?

There is no Ijmaa - only misguided people with diseased hearts talking from their desires. For your information lets see what one of Saalih Al-Munajjid's former teachers has to say on the subject.
The disbelief (kufr) of electing legislators besides Allah.
The Fatwa of Shaykh ‘Abdullah bin Muhammad al-Ghunaymaan.
The Shaykh, may Allah (swt) preserve him, says: “All creatures are the slaves of Allah (‘ibaad Allah), the Majestic and High, and He created them so that they may become worshipers of Allah, the Majestic and High. The slave must act according to the commands of His Master and a follower of His Speech and Shari’ah (Law), and not (become) a lord or a rival to Him in the legislation (tashree’a) and the judgment (hukm) between the creation. If he is like this, (then) he becomes a competitor with Allah to the same degree that Fir’awn (Pharaoh) and his fellow greater tawagheet did (i.e. those things which have transgressed the limits of Tawheed and are worshipped besides Allah).”
He also said: “And concerning that which makes a creature, which the people establish, choose and say that ‘this act is on my behalf’ or ‘I chose this’ – after which he becomes a legislator of laws which he judges by – (then) he came with something which negates his iman (belief) and he must review himself and seek repentance so he does not fall into shirk, which is the greatest of sins.”

Those who elect legislators along with Allah claim they do so because their intention is not to make them partners with Allah, but rather reformers. The answer of the Shaykh concerning this question which was addressed to him (is as follows): “If one does an action which is the opposite of the Shari’ah, his intention does not benefit him. The one who elects the legislator and (then) he says, ‘I only elect him to become a reformer’, although the action of this legislator is to be a partner along with Allah in terms of His legislation, which is against the Book of Allah and His legislation – (then) verily, the hukm (legislation) is for none but Allah (swt). However, the intention may be accepted if the action is permissible within the Shari’ah.

He also said, may Allah preserve him, “Yes, if a person knows that he elected this person so he can become a legislator, and he knows that (the right of) legislation is for none but Allah alone, the Majestic and High, and he said, ‘I want this person (as a legislator) because I know that he is a righteous person and he will establish righteousness which will prevent the Mufsideen (those who cause corruption) from taking over, and therefore I elect this person’, that will indeed not benefit him.”

He also said, “Although he claims his intention is righteous, it will not benefit him, even if it is righteous. This is because electing him on this basis is not permissible, and due to that he has fallen into a negating factor from among the negating factors of belief (iman).”

He also said in his answer to the question that if the person enters in legislative council and said he will not start legislating and will not practice any forms of legislation, but will only take the position of legislation (what is the ruling upon such a person)? He said, may Allah preserve him: “If he enters the government which consists of legislation and laws, he is surely content with it, and being content with laws from other than Allah, the Majestic and High, is kufr (disbelief). For example, if he allowed himself to become a legislator, that in itself is not only kufr, but he also becomes one of the heads of the tawagheet; and the tawagheet are many. He is one of the tawagheet because he lets the hukm be with him and not with Allah, the Majestic and High.”

He said, may Allah have mercy upon him, in an advice he gave to the voter (for man-made law): “My advice to you is to cling to the commands of this deen (religion), and to be steadfast upon the Tawheed of Allah (swt). And if you fall short of this, (then) you must repent and seek refuge and renew your iman. And the world does not benefit you, so the person must leave these matters and renew his deen should he have fallen into one of the negating factors which negate iman.”

Regarding the validity upon praying behind those voters who elect creatures in the position of legislation, he said, may Allah preserve him: “If one has fallen into that and he knows; praying behind him is not valid. One must pray behind those who have correct ‘aqeedah (creed/belief) and have not fallen into one of the negating factors which negate iman.”

[Taken from a recorded lecture delivered by Shaykh al-Ghunaymaan entitled: ‘And (agree) that none of us shall take others as lords besides Allah.’ (Aali ‘Imraan 3:64)]

Other ‘ulema (scholars) who support Shaykh al-Ghunaymaan in what has been mentioned above include Shaykh Muhammad al-Ameen ash-Shinqiti, Shaykh Muhammad bin Ahmad al-Furraaj, Shaykh Naasir al-‘Umar, Shaykh al-Muhaddith Abu Ayyub al Barqawi, Imam Abu ‘Isa ar-Rifa’ee and many others. We will now cite some of what they have said:

Shaykh al-Qahtaanee said: “Because the source of (the legislation in) democracy is the people, then what remains for Allah (swt)? Therefore, democracy, which is built upon this, is definitely kufr (disbelief) which takes you out of Islam…Democracy, by the definition of its people, is clear kufr (kufr buwaa).”

Shaykh ‘Abdullah as-Sad also said: “There is no doubt that democracy is kufr (disbelief), and I ask Allah (swt) to take us away from these things…The people of democracy will not allow you to join them unless you swear to act according to their law, and this is kufr (disbelief). Those people who implement Shaytaan’s law, and who call for democracy and elections, they only want to attract the anger of the Muslims…”

Shaykh Bishr al-Bishr also said: “If anyone is given the right to make law, his is a taghut (false god) because he is calling the people to worship him.”

Shaykh ad-Deebaan said, “From what I know about the Parliament, it is a committee (gathering) of tawagheet and it is not permissible for anyone to enter this on the basis of ‘benefit’ (maslaha) for the Muslims…”

There are also many other scholars who support this view.

As for your statement -

this proves how little you understand the nature of the parliamentary system and how little effect the so called 'Muslim' vote will have on policy making due to their small numbers. As a matter of fact the so-called 'Muslim' MP for Birmingham voted for the bombing of Iraq when it came to voting for military action in parliament in 2003 - eventhough he had the option to abstain. Is this your idea of voting against them....wake up. This method is only adopted by the ignorant and with those with diseased hearts polluted with hypocrisy.

who is behind the siteeeeeeeeeeee?

Inshallah we should vote and do our bit - I have pasted an article that may be on interest

ELECTIONS AND MUSLIMS - AN ISLAMIC PERSPECTIVE

An Islamic perspective Before we embark on the issue of whether Muslims will
be permitted or not to vote in the forthcoming General Elections, it would
be appropriate to bring the significance of voting in the light of Shariah
to the fore:-

The Significance Of Voting In The Light Of The Shariah

The elections should not be considered lightly as merely a game or a worldly
pursuit wherein someone wins and someone loses. It should not be perceived
as being a vic- tory or loss in terms of worldly and material gain alone.
Beneath all this machinery and mechanism of the voting and electoral process
there is also the spiritual aspect of either abiding by or transgressing the
Divine Laws Of Shapiah.

In the light of Shariah, casting of votes bears the hallmark of very
important responsibilities viz:

I. Voting as a form of testimony (Giving Shahadah):

Firstly, voting is a testimonial. By voting for a certain candidate or
party, the voters are indirectly testifying to the credibility of that
candidate or party. We, as voters, would be certifying that the party in
whose favour we are casting our votes is capable of delivering the goods in
as far as Islamic values and ideas are concerned. That party will endeavour
and fight for the preservation and survival of our Islamic Beliefs, Laws,
Norms and Values. It will not interfere with our Beliefs and Places of
Worship. It will give us the freedom and right to implement rulings and
judgements in religious issues in accordance with Muslim Personal Law. It
will uphold Islamic values such as eradicating oppression and fostering good
character, peace and harmony among the people.

II. Choosing 'Lesser of two evils ' if confronted with a choice:

As we are in a unique situation where all the parties are non-Islamic and
secular parties will not be able to guarantee all our Islamic requirements
and demands in their entirety. It would be naive to expect that Perhaps,
some party will oblige by guaranteeing most of them, in which case the voter
could then opt for a decision less detrimental to Deen. Rasulullah
(Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) has said.

[ Arabic text ]

Translation: He who is confronted with two crucial decisions, should opt for
the decision that is less detrimental [Kashful-khina Lil-Ajlooni vol 2, 322
and Asraarul-Mar-fooaah, Mulla Ali Qari 323).

III. Voting for a party less capable of fulfilling the rights of Muslims is
a breach of trust (Amanah):

Since seeing that voting is a testimony (giving Shahadah) and being aware
that a particular party will be more willing to fulfil our Islamic rights,
not to vote for this party will he tantamount to transgression and breach of
trust in the eyes of Shariah. Voting for a party that is less sympathetic to
the Islamic cause would not only mean giving false evidence (which is a
sin), but it could also mean becoming an instrument and tool of ensuing
havoc, and corruption caused by that party in as far as the complete
disregard of Islamic values and ideas is concerned.

IV. Voting and bribery (Rishwah):

One should also take cognisance of the fact that it has virtually become a
norm of the elections-albeit a corrupted norm that in order to woo voters,
parties tend to offer bribes in exchange for votes. Such bribery should be
rejected with the contempt it deserves. Voting should he based on total
integrity and sincerity wherein priority should he given to upholding the
torch of Islam. The honour and dignity of the Muslims should he maintained
at all times. The Deenul-Islam entrusted to us by Allah Ta'ala should be
viewed not only as a boon but also as an awsome responsibility; hence
extreme caution and diligence should be exercised in keeping its prestige
aloft. One cannot surrender ones Islamic ethics for the sake of pittance of
the Dunya. Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) has warned us in a
Hadith that a time will come when a Muslim will sell his Deen for a few
coppers. Hence, if a Muslim exercises his right of voting, he should do so
keeping the consequences of the Hereafter in mind and not regard it as
something to he done impromptu merely because it is a custom of the times or
because ulterior motives can he achieved thereby.

V. Voting as a form of intercession (Shafaat):

Another aspect attached to voting is that it is a form of intercession. In
other words, the voter intercedes for a certain party to come into a
position where it can wield its power to acquire religious and other basic
rights for the masses. Regarding intercession the Qur'an declares:

[ Arabic text ]

Translation: Whosoever intercedes with a good intercession, his shall be a
portion there-from and whosoever intercedes an ill intercession his shall be
a responsibility thereof." (Al Qur'an 4:85)

The ideal intercession in an electoral process would be to intercede on
behalf of the party deemed most likely to safeguard Islamic rights in
particular and human rights in general. Incorrect and misleading
intercession would mean voting and interceding for a party that would be
unsympathetic to the tenets and requirements of Islam. For instance, it
would not be permissible to vote for a party that shows complete
indifference to Islamic Personal Law or/and clings to the now medieval
policy of discrimination on the basis of colour and race; as such policies
and doctrines are in total conflict with Islamic teachings. Interceding for
such a party would mean becoming a tool of oppression and injustice.

VI. Voting must not be an aid to injustice:

Allah Ta'ala says in the Qur'an:

[ arabic ]

Translation: "And assist one another in acts of righteousness and piety and
do not assist one another in act of transgression and sin." (Al-Qur'an 5:2)

[ arabic ]

Translation: "I do not wish to be an aid to the wrong-doers." (Al-Qur'an
28:17).

Commenting on the latter verse Allamah Qurtabi rahmatullahi alaih writes in
his tafseer:

[ arabic ]

Translation: "Ataa rahmtiillahi alaih has said regarding this verse that it
is not permissible to render any assistance to a tyrant and an oppressor."
Allamah Ourtabi rahmatullahi alaih further goes on to quote a Hadith in
which Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) has said: 'Whosoever walks
with an oppressed person in order to assist him with his problems, Allah
Ta'aala will, on the Day of Qiyamah keep the feet of such a person firm on
the Pul-Siraat while the feet of others will be faltering. On the other
hand, he who walks with an oppressor in order to assist him in promoting
acts of injustice, Allah Ta'aala will cause his feet to falter on the
Pul-Siraat on the Day when other feet will also falter.' After quoting this
Hadith, Allamah Ourtabi rahmatiulaahi alaih sums up:

Merely walking (or talking and negotiating for that matter) with an
oppressor is not in itself a crime and sin (especially when the motive is
to steer the oppressor away from4 acts of oppression); but it becomes a sin
when one begins to assist him in spreading oppression and tyranny because
this constitutes a flagrant violation."'(Tafseer-e-Qurtabi Vol 7, 4979).

In a Hadith Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) has sounded a grave
warning with regard to oppression:-

[ arabic ]

Translation:- "Whoever oppresses his brother (in this Dunya), whether it be
in the form of usurping someone's wealth or in any other manner, he should
compensate and make up for that; before a Day comes (the Day of Qiyamah)
when there will be no Dirham or Dinaar (money) at his disposal with which to
redeem himself There compensation will materialise in the form of righteous
deeds being taken from the oppressor (in proportion to the injustice
perpetrated) and given. If perchance the oppressor has no good deeds to his
credit, then the oppressed person's sins will be taken and thrown onto the
oppressor. (Sahih Bukhari; Mishkaat p.4351]

VII Voting as a form of representation:

Voting is also attached to the principle of representation. By voting for a
certain party, one is in essence appointing that party as a representative
for one's Islamic and human rights. Here too, extreme caution has to be
exercised. Only that party should be considered eligible for representation
that can strive for the implementation of our Islamic rights. Incorrect
representation will ultimately lead to corruption and depravity will not he
confined to mere individuals, but will have a broader effect on the Muslim
community as a whole.

VIII. Voting as a form of consultation (Mashwarah):

Shura means to give counsel. Thus a prospective voter is offering his
suggestion as to who, in his opinion is the most entitled to receive the
vote.

You have now called Shaykh Munajjid misguided with a diseased heart. There really is no need to argue further on this since you've exposed yourself, calling the shuyukh misguided, etc.

You are quoting from people who practically had no idea what voting is! They had no education of the political system in western countries. This is now based on hearsay, and hearsay is invalid evidence.

I agree with the above.

I agree with the above as well. But neither of these quotes disprove voting!!

I agree with the above as well. But it has nothing to do with voting since we accept only the supremacy of Allah swt in legislation, not human beings!

Unfortunately, Shaykh Qahtanee's statement is not based on a solid understanding of democracy.

The same is true for the remaining statements you have provided.

This is just down right ludicrous! On one hand you are forbidding Muslims from voting, while on the other hand you complain about the lack of influence we have in non-muslim countries!!

You don't become influential overnight. The Muslims are making rapid progress in establishing Islam in the west, but there is only one obstacle in their path - people like you. Those who go against the Ijmaa of the scholars and make haraam what Allah swt has made halal.

Who cares? That proves nothing. Just because you can point to a so-called muslim who didn't do his duty, does that mean no one should do their duty?

The analogy is that we wish to defend a person from attack, but you prevent us from doing so by pointing out that once another 'Muslim' went to defend someone but instead killed him.

Poor argument.


And lastly, I will show you another fatwa on the issue of voting, from a scholar who has understanding of what voting is:

Shaykh Salman Al-Oadah:

I hold the opinion that it is lawful to participate in elections, as this may reduce suffering, and it is a way to choose the better among the availible candidates. I believe participating in elections will, in any event, contribute to the reduction of evil and be a forum for countering bad policies and exposing their deficiencies, as well as being an opportunity to present proposals of a different kind that may help people.

Now I have provided you with the fatwa from both Islam-qa, and Islamtoday, sites with knowledgable scholars and authentic creed. The issue is very clear that voting is permissable, and often encouraged.

Really? If that was the case you wouldn't be promoting the idea of voting and thereby electing legislators besides Allah - and thereby nullifying your belief in Allah - since this attribute of legislation only belongs to Him, only if some ignorant people understood this uncomplicated and vital point.

You have now called Shaykh Munajjid misguided with a diseased heart. There really is no need to argue further on this since you've exposed yourself, calling the shuyukh misguided, etc.

Salaam Brother Ansar al Haq

( haqq means "Truth"... did you know that? )

He didn't specficially call your scholar misguided simply because it would cause you to react in the way you have. He said misguided people are giving out these dodgy fatwas, fine. He didn't give names. So please cary on with the discussion without trying to find any excuse to create other little skirmishes which have no point.

Ma'salaama

Can you show me where we have removed the legislation from Allah swt?

bro. He's not my scholar anymore that Shaykh Bin Baaz or Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah are my scholars. The reason why I'm emphasizing this point so much is because in the past, SonOfAdam has laid tremendous stress on following scholars like Shaykh Munajjid, but now we see that he doesn't do so himself. Hence, the following verse applies:
61:2-3 O you who believe! Why do you say that which you do not do?
Most hateful it is with Allâh that you say that which you do not do.

Perhaps you should try to understand the discussion before hurling accusations at me.