Muslims urged to vote to keep out extremist parties

  • Thread starter Thread starter Uthman
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 235
  • Views Views 22K
Uthman

Uthman

LI News Service
Messages
5,513
Reaction score
1,216
Gender
Male
Religion
Islam
Low turnout could lead to 'openly anti-Muslim parties winning seats in European parliament'.

Muslim scholars in Britain have urged the country's imams to stress the importance of local and European elections during their sermons, warning that a low turnout could lead to "openly anti-Muslim parties" gaining national and international prominence.

In a joint statement issued yesterday they called for imams to discuss the need to vote with their congregations as part of their khutbahs – the sermon delivered before Friday afternoon prayers. They said Muslims should go to the ballots on 4 June and "discharge their duty as responsible citizens".

"Participating in the democratic process is vital," the statement said. "As citizens we have a right to choose the people who represent us and to determine who gets to affect our daily lives. As Muslims, we have an obligation to join hands with others to elect those who will seek the common good.

"For the first time, openly anti-Muslim parties have a very real chance of gaining national prominence by winning a seat in the European parliament. They will join Islamophobes from continental Europe to further perpetuate their message of hate against Muslims."

Signatories to the statement include representatives from North London Central Mosque, Green Lane Mosque, Birmingham, and the Council of Muslim theologians.

The scholars said that some party leaders had described Islam as "a vicious, wicked faith" and "accused Muslims of all sorts of crimes".

"Their words have led to racist violence – if they get elected they will have public funding that will only amplify their vicious Islamophobia."

Muslims should exercise their vote and use the opportunity to vote for people who they felt would represent them and would discharge their duty "to seek the common good in a spirit of public service", the scholars said.

"It is a time to demand greater scrutiny of those who represent us."
They cautioned against feelings of complacency and disaffection brought on by the MPs expense scandal.

The statement follows a call by the Church of England's most senior clerics for voters to shun extremist parties whose "core ideology" was sowing division and hostility in Britain's communities based on race or creed.

The archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, and the archbishop of York, John Sentamu, said it would be "tragic" if people reacted to the expenses scandal by rejecting mainstream parties and either not voting or voting for extreme groups.

Source
 
Should Muslims vote for the sole reason of trying to keep out anti-Muslim parties?

Have we had this discussion before?
 
Should Muslims vote for the sole reason of trying to keep out anti-Muslim parties?
Click to expand...
yes but I peronally prefer to vote for better people rather than against bad people
Have we had this discussion before?
Click to expand...
yes
 
Last edited:
Uthmān;1159515 said:
Should Muslims vote for the sole reason of trying to keep out anti-Muslim parties?

Have we had this discussion before?
Click to expand...

Just my humble personal opinion. We are obligated to overthrow and prevent tyranny. This is a jihad. A jihad is best fought with the most effective weapons. The weapons of the past are no longer efective and only lead to long time suffering with little change or just temporary change. The best weapon of today is paper bullets shot at or against specific targets. These paper bullets are votes. When used effectivly a vote is a very accurate bullet that hits only the specific target, with no collateral damage nor lose of innocent lives. A jihad with physical weapons is a war, an election can be a jihad, the only difference is the weapons used. A war is simply an election in which the votes are made of lead, steel and explosives. It is still an election. Why not use the sensible weapons and fight with ballots, not bullets. Ballots can be used by all Muslims, including the old and feeble. This allows us older frail members of the Ummah to be mujahidins in our own fashion and does not limit the honor to only the young and strong.
 
JazakAllah Khayr and thank you for the responses. Logically, I would tend to agree with both of you but naturally the Islamic view must come first. Can we find any guidance on the issue from the Qur'an and/or Sunnah? And what of those who say that it is haraam to participate in the democratic process?
 
Last edited:
the people of knowledge i have spoken to about this (i asked before last year's election) have said that when voting essentially amounts to bayyah (i.e. voting for a person), it is haraam but when voting on an issue (i.e. a bill to allow gambling) then you must vote.
 
convert said:
the people of knowledge i have spoken to about this (i asked before last year's election) have said that when voting essentially amounts to bayyah (i.e. voting for a person), it is haraam but when voting on an issue (i.e. a bill to allow gambling) then you must vote.
Click to expand...
JazakAllah Khayr akhee. This does make perfect sense in general circumstances but the circumstances here are specifically to prevent anti-Muslim parties from gaining power.

When discussing this issue, I usually quote Ibn Taimiyyah where he said:

"The Shari'ah has been revealed to obtain all possible benefits and to prevent as much harm as possible and reduce it. Its aim is to produce the best possible scenario from two good options if both cannot be achieved together, and to ward off the worst of two evils if both evils cannot be prevented."

Where Muslims are not in a position to make Hijrah, I wonder whether it would make sense from an Islamic point of view to vote with the intention of producing the best possible situation for the Muslims or warding off the worst possible situation.

Having said that, it is still impermissible to judge by other than what Allah has revealed and to do so is major kufr. Thus, to participate in the democratic process by voting is to contribute to the implementation of a Shari'ah other than the Shari'ah revealed by Allah. Can we really say that this could ever be allowed?

I really don't know.
 
Last edited:
convert said:
the people of knowledge i have spoken to about this (i asked before last year's election) have said that when voting essentially amounts to bayyah (i.e. voting for a person), it is haraam but when voting on an issue (i.e. a bill to allow gambling) then you must vote.
Click to expand...

Sadly many people do vote for the person and pay no attention to the political party the person is representing. The fact is in most countries you are not voting for a person although it is the name of a person that appears on the ballot. The person is only the spokesman for a party, the vote is actually electing an ideology

In the USA in the voting booths you can choose to simply vote a straight party ticket and need not even look at the names of the candidates.

While Americans may say they were voting for Obama or McCain, they were not voting for the person they were voting for the party the candidate spoke for.It is a mistake to vote for the person, your vote should be for the party you believe in no matter what you think of the person.



For example here in the USA while we elected Obama, it is not him who runs the Presidency, it is the Democratic party. If anything were to happen to Obama it would make no change in the government, as it would still be the democratic party in office and will be like that until the next presidential election no matter what happens to the person in office. It is the party that was elected to run the country, not a person.
 
I hear there's been a huge row in Britain over the MP's useless spendings. The smaller aprties are gaining votes because of it.
 
Woodrow said:
Sadly many people do vote for the person and pay no attention to the political party the person is representing. The fact is in most countries you are not voting for a person although it is the name of a person that appears on the ballot. The person is only the spokesman for a party, the vote is actually electing an ideology

In the USA in the voting booths you can choose to simply vote a streight

While Americans may say they were voting for Obama or McCain, they were not voting for the person they were voting for the party the candidate spoke for.It is a mistake to vote for the person, your vote should be for the party you believe in no matter what you think of the person.



For example here in the USA while we elected Obama, it is not him who runs the Presidency, it is the Democratic party. If anything were to happen to Obama it would make no change in the government, as it would still be the democratic party in office and will be like that until the next presidential election no matter what happens to the person in office. It is the party that was elected to run the country, not a person.
Click to expand...

im an american myself. what we have in an oligarchy here, same people run the show no matter what person/party is in power.

ive said it before: the only thing worse than a republican is a democrat.

p.s. i live near dc and the sheer scope of the cult of personality surrounding obama here is frightening
 
convert said:
im an american myself. what we have in an oligarchy here, same people run the show no matter what person/party is in power.

ive said it before: the only thing worse than a republican is a democrat.

p.s. i live near dc and the sheer scope of the cult of personality surrounding obama here is frightening
Click to expand...

The same happened with Kennedy in the Irish/Catholic communities near Boston after he was elected. This was a case of the person outgrowing the party and ending up representing himself. The same may be true with Obama. I already see him straying from his party representation and turning his presidency into Obamaism. Mistake to elect on the basis of the person and not the party stand. It can be for the general good as it was with Kennedy or it can turn into something vicious like it did for Nixon and the 2 Shrubs. Obama may be betraying the people who wanted a democratic presidency and not Obamaism.
 
Uthmān;1159515 said:
Should Muslims vote for the sole reason of trying to keep out anti-Muslim parties?

Have we had this discussion before?
Click to expand...

Salaam

Yes we have to vote for the greater good.

We have had this discussion before - but this looks like a serious threat to muslims in the UK.
 
Last edited:
Fishman said:
:sl:
Eh?
:w:
Click to expand...

Well, it's just that I always find these discussions on here a bit depressing.

The real question always basically amounts to: "shall we participate?", "do we want to be part of this society or is it too corrupt/kufr for us to be involved?"

That this is even being discussed, let alone that many indeed do think it is haram to, say, vote, is just not something that makes me optimistic about the future. That is all.
 
^I think a better way to phrase that would be "Does participating in this particular aspect of society go against my beliefs?". There's nothing wrong with participating in society (which is what the way you phrased it makes it sound like), just as long as it doesn't mean going against your religion.
 
Just my humble personal opinion. We are obligated to overthrow and prevent tyranny. This is a jihad.
Click to expand...
Subhanallah, Qalb el-Mo'men Daliloh (Heart of a believer guides him) :) The prophet -pbuh- was asked about kinds of Jihad and he said that one of the best is "A word of truth to an unjust ruler". This vote is your word of truth against electing bad rulers and representatives and definitely can be seen as Jihad based on the Hadith.

There is nothing specifically wrong with the democratic process of casting votes to follow majority opinions, unless it is to choose a person to lead which implies Bayaa, and that is not permissible to give to a non-muslim, yes that is known. But if the process is to choose an ideology that is less harmful to muslims, then it is a tool of itself to use and push off an evil person off your muslim brethren and your intentions are what guides you (innama al-aamalo benniyyat - Deeds are of intentions).

And God knows best, this is not a fatwa though. I need to check with my professors.
 
:sl:
Uthmān;1159600 said:
..... And what of those who say that it is haraam to participate in the democratic process?
Click to expand...
see rep message
wasalam
 
Last edited:
KAding said:
Well, it's just that I always find these discussions on here a bit depressing.

The real question always basically amounts to: "shall we participate?", "do we want to be part of this society or is it too corrupt/kufr for us to be involved?"

That this is even being discussed, let alone that many indeed do think it is haram to, say, vote, is just not something that makes me optimistic about the future. That is all.
Click to expand...

Well actually if I was a Brittish I would prefer muslims there not to vote, neither integrate or participate.
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top