PDA

View Full Version : most islamic country/place?



Ummu Sufyaan
07-24-2009, 12:09 PM
:sl:
where is it? a place that implements the shariah law without caring who frowns upon it? does it exist? :'(
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
crayon
07-24-2009, 12:30 PM
Mecca and Madinah, 13 years after hijra.

And then things went wrong. Very very wrong.
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
07-24-2009, 12:40 PM
:sl:
ahh mayn i cant go back in time :'(
oh sigh not having a pious Muslim authority over you is like the worst :exhausted
Reply

- IqRa -
07-24-2009, 01:00 PM
In Madina.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Ali_008
07-24-2009, 01:00 PM
:sl:
I think it was Taliban but they never had any clue about the right interpretation of Islam. :? I had seen a movie once which talked about Afghanistan and Taliban, it showed that if some smoke came out of a house during Ramadaan at daytime, it was a crime. You can't force anyone to fast.

Under some dictators it was Pakistan some time ago. I think in the 70s and 80s but got hammered and hammered.

Now whatever fraction of Shariah you can see as part of the government is only in Saudi Arabia. :(
:w:
Reply

Intisar
07-24-2009, 01:17 PM
:wa: Unfortunately, there is none.
Reply

- IqRa -
07-24-2009, 01:19 PM
So are you saying Makkah/Madina is not Islamic? SubhanAllaah.
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
07-25-2009, 11:47 AM
:sl:
Originally Posted by T.I.A
So are you saying Makkah/Madina is not Islamic? SubhanAllaah.
mecca and madinah are Islamic, not too sure about the authority over them...

Originally Posted by Ali_008
Now whatever fraction of Shariah you can see as part of the government is only in Saudi Arabia. :(
see above :-\
Reply

M.B
07-25-2009, 11:58 AM
:sl:
YEMEN ?? but dont think u would like to live there.

:w:
Reply

GuestFellow
07-25-2009, 11:59 AM
Originally Posted by Umm ul-Shaheed
:sl:

mecca and madinah are Islamic, not too sure about the authority over them...
I heard they follow a particular sect of Islam. I read about it but I don't understand what purpose it serves.... :hmm:
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
07-25-2009, 12:03 PM
:sl:
YEMEN ?? but dont think u would like to live there.
why not?
Reply

M.B
07-25-2009, 12:05 PM
:sl:


Its abit old aint it and its very hard living there.
Guess u dont mind right im sayin that it is a very good country mashallah with their deen.

:w:
Reply

Thinker
07-25-2009, 12:07 PM
Originally Posted by Umm ul-Shaheed
:sl:
where is it? a place that implements the shariah law without caring who frowns upon it? does it exist? :'(
Most islamic country/place?

Good question, I'd like to know the answer and why? Why did you qualify 'country', presumably you have in mind a plave which is not a country?
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
07-25-2009, 12:18 PM
^why not? should there be a place in mind which is not a country?
there maybe some places perhaps villages/towns where the shariah is implemented? i recall you mentioning in one of your posts awhile ago some place is Pakistan? why's that such a big deal?
Reply

Zafran
07-25-2009, 12:25 PM
salaam

you also have to remember that most of these mid east "countries" were made after WW1 - they are all modern states.
Reply

thetruth2009
07-25-2009, 12:39 PM
Assalam aleykoum Sisters and brothers,


I think you are dreaming, where do you see an islamic country based on the Sharia ?

Our government mix Human law with Divine law.

Please do not talk about Saoudia, I respect them as Human, I am talking about Saudia government, not people ( you will find the truth by yourself )

I do not want talk about it and I hate talking about people, they will be judge in jugment day like you and me.

Assalam aleykoum sisters and brother , I ask god to guide us, Amine.
Reply

noorseeker
07-25-2009, 12:40 PM
coventry road, birmingham lol . its like the only road i see practising people, niqabi central.

sorry i know you meant a country.its just that i feel happy when i go down there.
Reply

Tony
07-25-2009, 12:43 PM
Originally Posted by Umm ul-Shaheed
:sl:
where is it? a place that implements the shariah law without caring who frowns upon it? does it exist? :'(
May Allah cause it to be in England, Ameen
Reply

Brasco
07-25-2009, 01:03 PM
Many islamic countries have a dual system of secular courts and religious courts. As far as I know, Saudi Arabia is a monarchy and the Qur'an is the constitution of the country plus it is governed on the basis of Sharia.
Reply

Thinker
07-26-2009, 11:10 AM
Amazing, it seems that one of the top is not the top Islamic country/place is the UK and there are so many members here who abhor our values and who support the values of those that would do us harm!!
Reply

Thinker
07-26-2009, 11:21 AM
Originally Posted by nightstar
coventry road, birmingham lol . its like the only road i see practising people, niqabi central.
Those Muslims, who take the extremely or literal or fundamental interpretation of Islamic text to, for example, wear the niqab and not shake hands etc., how do they get around the Islamic text that commands that they not live in the land of the muskreen and are they wearing the niqab etc., because they feel guilty and hope that God will forgive them ignoring those commands that they don’t like?

(PS I am not asking the question to irritate you I’d really like to know the answer)
Reply

Blackpool
07-26-2009, 11:45 AM
Originally Posted by Tony
May Allah cause it to be in England, Ameen
No thanks..
Reply

noorseeker
07-26-2009, 12:43 PM
Originally Posted by Thinker
Those Muslims, who take the extremely or literal or fundamental interpretation of Islamic text to, for example, wear the niqab and not shake hands etc., how do they get around the Islamic text that commands that they not live in the land of the muskreen and are they wearing the niqab etc., because they feel guilty and hope that God will forgive them ignoring those commands that they don’t like?

(PS I am not asking the question to irritate you I’d really like to know the answer)
I would like to know aswell, wheter its okay for us to live in non muslim countries, i was born here, this is home, where do you want me to go.
Reply

Thinker
07-26-2009, 02:47 PM
Originally Posted by nightstar
I would like to know aswell, wheter its okay for us to live in non muslim countries, i was born here, this is home, where do you want me to go.
I want you all to stay and call it home, to give your loyalty and support to the country and its military and police forces that protect you - but that’s just what I want. For reasons of your own, some of you cannot do that. Muhammad, in his wisdom, appears to have anticipated this problem and decreed that you should only live amongst muskreen temporarily and just for trade and should strive to migrate to dar-al-Islam. What I can’t understand is how some of you strive so hard to abide by the letter of the law on some text and totally ignore other text and I wondered if they did the former because they feel guilty.

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/3225

“Verily, as for those whom the angels take (in death) while they are wronging themselves (as they stayed among the disbelievers even though emigration was obligatory for them), they (angels) say (to them): “In what (condition) were you?” They reply: “We were weak and oppressed on the earth.” They (angels) say: “Was not the earth of Allaah spacious enough for you to emigrate therein?” Such men will find their abode in Hell — what an evil destination! Except the weak ones among men, women and children who cannot devise a plan, nor are they able to direct their way. These are they whom Allaah is likely to forgive them, and Allaah is Ever Oft-Pardoning, Oft-Forgiving” [al-Nisaa’ 4:97-99]
Reply

GuestFellow
07-26-2009, 03:16 PM
Originally Posted by Thinker
I want you all to stay and call it home, to give your loyalty and support to the country and its military and police forces that protect you
I do support the UK though I do not agree with everything they do.

I'm British Pakistani, even though I was born in the UK, I often get comments where people have told me go back to Pakistan or that I'm not welcomed here.

At one point I did leave the UK and went back to Pakistan, but even there people considered me to be an outsider and not treated equally but worse. I even considered going to live in a Muslim country. From what I heard and learnt from others, Saudi Arabia does not welcome outsiders to live in their country despite if they are Muslims or not. I looked at many Muslim countries, and I'm afraid nationality comes first.

I'm not welcomed anywhere lol. So where shall I go now?

So I don't believe in nationality because people may support the government even though they do something wrong. Nationality just makes people differences more apparent. I also agree religion can do that too.

I prefer not to swear my loyalty to anyone but to Allah only. I only support people who have good intentions. Religion and nationality don't mean anything to me, unless if that person is genuinely good.
Reply

Amadeus85
07-26-2009, 03:34 PM
Originally Posted by Thinker
Amazing, it seems that one of the top is not the top Islamic country/place is the UK and there are so many members here who abhor our values and who support the values of those that would do us harm!!

Say thnx to secular state and freedom of religion.
Reply

Blackpool
07-26-2009, 04:37 PM
And democracy...
Reply

Ar-RaYYan
07-26-2009, 08:13 PM
Originally Posted by Thinker
Those Muslims, who take the extremely or literal or fundamental interpretation of Islamic text to, for example, wear the niqab and not shake hands etc., how do they get around the Islamic text that commands that they not live in the land of the muskreen and are they wearing the niqab etc., because they feel guilty and hope that God will forgive them ignoring those commands that they don’t like? (PS I am not asking the question to irritate you I’d really like to know the answer)
you should stop making those horrible assumptions of yours. How do you know if these people are not in the process of making hijrah or have tried but failed because those so called 'islamic' countries dont like outsiders. Why do you assume that a niqaabi or bearded brother automatically means they are immigrants. What do you suggest the British government should do about those who are born in the country- force them to go back to the country they were originally from? More importantly what do you think the govt should do about those native British reverts? Coventry road, bham has a large quantity of white British muslims than any other places in Birmingham and even in UK.
Reply

Amadeus85
07-26-2009, 09:19 PM
Originally Posted by Blackpool
And democracy...
To be more specific You should say - secular liberal democracy (which is a typical english idea btw), because the classical (greek) democracy was theocratic, as the Greeks believed that the every power (also political) comes from their gods. But the system in which all elements of the Order (call it natural law or God's law) - religion,family,posession and justice - can be disputed, is a real mess system, which USA is a good example.
Reply

chacha_jalebi
07-26-2009, 09:45 PM
Originally Posted by crayon
Mecca and Madinah, 13 years after hijra.

And then things went wrong. Very very wrong.
:D indeeeed :skeleton:

lol i would still say saudi is the most islamic, but i believe its kinda corrupt aswell, like most islamic countries, but like i duno, there is good and bad everywer, on a level alhumdulilla uk is runnin thins :shade:
Reply

jerryleeevans
07-27-2009, 09:16 AM
I do not think it is truly possible in the world today, to have a "nation" governed specifically by Islamic law. The world has gone smaller, due to human advancement, and now you have people immigrating from other nations, cutlures and religions.

We as Muslims must not force our ideals on the world, nor force unbelievers to live by what the Holy Qu'ran states. We can develop communities within our cities, and follow Sharia that way.
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
07-27-2009, 10:21 AM
Originally Posted by Thinker
Amazing, it seems that one of the top is not the top Islamic country/place is the UK and there are so many members here who abhor our values and who support the values of those that would do us harm!!
so many members?...you mean like 2/3?...wow the numbers are sky rocketing, aren't they...

Originally Posted by Blackpool
No thanks..
yes, please...

Originally Posted by Thinker
I want you all to stay and call it home, to give your loyalty and support to the country and its military and police forces that protect you - but that’s just what I want.
you make it sounds as if we're Muslims for your sake.

What I can’t understand is how some of you strive so hard to abide by the letter of the law on some text and totally ignore other text and I wondered if they did the former because they feel guilty.
or perhaps it may have been this (from the very same link you posted, may i add)
Whoever is unable to migrate – men, women or children – will be excused[...]
or maybe
Except the weak ones among men, women and children who cannot devise a plan, nor are they able to direct their way. These are they whom Allaah is likely to forgive them, and Allaah is Ever Oft-Pardoning, Oft-Forgiving”
though i have to comment...for someone who is so adamant against the Shariah law, you certainly seem to be doing a good job of preaching it....so, thank you!

Those Muslims, who take the extremely or literal or fundamental interpretation of Islamic text to, for example, wear the niqab and not shake hands etc., how do they get around the Islamic text that commands that they not live in the land of the muskreen and are they wearing the niqab etc.,
because the countries we live in are supposedly freedom loving? geez, you wouldn't want to frown upon democracy would ya now?

on the side: im sorry that a piece of cloth makes you feel insecure, paranoid and intimidated Sir Stinker, but please do elaborate as to why its any of my business that a niqqabi should have to put up with your hang up, becuase in all honesty im failing to understand it. and whilst your at it, please explain why someone should dictate who gets to touch my hand and who gets to look at my eyes.


because they feel guilty and hope that God will forgive them ignoring those commands that they don’t like?
commands that we don't like? is that the best you can come up with? you've completely made it look like a one horse race -so to speak- to support your ignorant views...you have isolated one possibly and made it sound as if it's the only one, whilst ignoring other valid ones, such as the one mentioned above. not very wise of you now, is it?

(PS I am not asking the question to irritate you I’d really like to know the answer)
you mean your other statements were intended to irritate us? i'm glad to see you are willing to point out your own mistake.
Reply

Thinker
07-27-2009, 10:58 AM
Originally Posted by Ar-RaYYan
you should stop making those horrible assumptions of yours. How do you know if these people are not in the process of making hijrah or have tried but failed because those so called 'islamic' countries dont like outsiders. Why do you assume that a niqaabi or bearded brother automatically means they are immigrants. What do you suggest the British government should do about those who are born in the country- force them to go back to the country they were originally from? More importantly what do you think the govt should do about those native British reverts? Coventry road, bham has a large quantity of white British muslims than any other places in Birmingham and even in UK.
You appear to have read something in my posts which is not there!

1. How do I know that people aren’t in the process of making hijrah?
I didn’t say or infer that anyone in particular was not making hijrah but as the Muslim migrant population in the UK is increasing it is a reasonable assumption that vast majority are not leaving.
2. Why do you assume that a niqaabi or bearded brother automatically means they are immigrants?
I didn’t make that assumption – why do you assume that because God commanded that Muslims must make hijrah he meant solely those who came from a Muslim country. In fact, the only Muslim on this forum who has declared his intent to make hijrah is Dawuduk who (I believe) is a native British convert and who I applauded many times for his honesty and integrity in that regard. As we have not heard from him for some time I presume he is now somewhere in the Swat valley with his ‘brothers’.
3. What do you suggest the British government should do about those who are born in the country- force them to go back to the country they were originally from?
No I most certainly do not and have never suggested any such action.
4. More importantly what do you think the govt should do about those native British reverts?
I don’t suggest anything and they don’t suggest anything, on the other hand Islamic teachings does - it suggest ney God commands hijrah.
5. Coventry road, bham has a large quantity of white British muslims than any other places in Birmingham and even in UK.
So?

You appear to have missed my point in raising this issue. The point was how do you reconcile the struggle by some to act out the letter of the text (and I gave examples like not shaking hands) but ignore commands (like hijrah) that you don’t like?
Reply

Thinker
07-27-2009, 11:03 AM
Originally Posted by Umm ul-Shaheed

Whoever is unable to migrate – men, women or children – will be excused[...]


Out of context - tut tut, naughty, very naughty:thumbs_do
Reply

Lost&Found
07-28-2009, 09:47 AM
Originally Posted by Umm ul-Shaheed
:sl:
where is it? a place that implements the shariah law without caring who frowns upon it? does it exist? :'(
Gaza?

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip – Police order a lingerie shop to hide its scantily clad mannequins. A judge warns female lawyers to wear head scarves in court. Beach patrols break up groups of singles and make men wear shirts.

It's all part of a new Hamas campaign to get Gazans to adhere to a strict Muslim lifestyle — and the first clear attempt by the Islamic militants to go beyond benign persuasion in doing so.

It suggests that having consolidated its hold on Gaza in the two years since it seized control by force, Hamas feels emboldened enough to extend its ideology into people's private lives.

Hamas insists compliance with its "virtue campaign" is still voluntary and simply responds to a Gazan preference for conservative ways. But the rules are vague and there are reports of alleged offenders being beaten and teachers being told to pressure girls to wear head scarves.

The campaign highlights the differing trajectories of the West Bank and Gaza — the two parts of the Palestinian state that the Obama administration hopes to midwife. Washington's efforts move into higher gear this week with visits by U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and three top U.S. diplomats.

While Hamas pushes its dress code and Gaza remains impoverished under international embargo, West Bankers are enjoying an economic revival fed by foreign aid. Although most are conservative, there's more tolerance for a fairly large secular minority.

The West Bank's dominant party, Fatah, is making an attempt at a comeback, after suffering a stinging election defeat at the hands of Hamas in 2006.

Next week, Fatah will hold its first convention in 20 years, hoping to show that it has reformed itself, has shed its corruption-tainted image and makes an attractive alternative to Hamas.

Hamas, known for its keen sense of public opinion, pledged after its June 2007 takeover to refrain from imposing Islamic ways.

That is changing, says Khalil Abu Shammala, a human rights activist in Gaza.

"There are attempts to Islamize this society," he said. Hamas' denials "contradict what we see on the street."

The "virtue campaign" is being spread by the Religious Affairs Ministry in a list of do's and don'ts that feature on posters and in mosque sermons. It also calls for gender separation at wedding parties and tells teens to shun pop music with suggestive lyrics. "We have to encourage people to be virtuous and keep them away from sin," said Abdullah Abu Jarbou, the deputy religious affairs minister.

Another Gaza human rights activist, Hamdi Shakour, blamed the border blockade imposed by Israel and Egypt after Hamas ousted the territory's Fatah rulers. He said isolation has bred "extremism and dark ideas."

Gaza maintains small islands of secularism. Foreigners are rarely harassed, and Gaza women in stylish clothes and hairdos, many of them Muslims, frequent a half-dozen upmarket cafes and restaurants.

But Abdel Raouf Halabi, Gaza's chief supreme court judge, this month ordered female lawyers to wear head scarves and dark robes or be barred from courtrooms when their work resumes Sept. 1. "We will not allow people to ruin morals," he explained.

Only about 10 of some 150 female lawyers are affected, reflecting how deeply Islamic values already prevail. One of the unscarved is Subhiya Juma, who said the ruling "is taking away our personal freedom."

Juma said she would not wear a head scarf and hoped a public outcry would pressure Hamas officials to withdraw the order.

In government schools, head scarves for female students are supposed to be optional. But one high school has made robes and head scarves a condition for enrollment. Teachers are now being asked to pressure the girls to put them on, said Education Ministry spokesman Khaled Radi.

Police are enforcing the restrictions on mannequins and salesmen say they ripped off the tags on packages of panties and bras which showed women in underwear.

Other shopkeepers said they were told to remove the mannequins' heads so they don't violate the Islamic ban on copying the human form.

Enforcement is spotty and seems restricted to working-class markets. Most traders said they moved the mannequins back after police left.

Lingerie seller Mohammed Helu, 23, hid his under-clad mannequins but was allowed to display an outfit of a plunging top and miniskirt with the mannequin's head covered by a plastic bag.

On a Gaza beach, Mohammed Amta, 18, said a plainclothes security man told him to put on a shirt, saying his appearance was un-Islamic, and to remove his two silver rings and woven bracelet because they were a sign of Western culture.

A lifeguard said he was told to wear an undershirt and knee-length shorts. "They said that's how Muslims should dress," he said. He declined to be named, fearing he would lose his Hamas-provided job.

Last month, three young men walking on the beach with a female friend said they were beaten by Hamas police, detained and ordered to sign statements promising not to engage in "immoral activities."

The Hamas government condemned the beatings. But it remained silent when a Hamas leader, Younis Astal, accused U.N.-run summer camps for tens of thousands of children of spreading drug use and encouraging "obscene behavior" for teaching swimming and folklore dance.

Abu Jarbou, the deputy minister, insisted that Hamas would move gradually and not impose its views by force. Still, Islamic law is coming, he said.

"In the future, it's inevitable it will be implemented," he said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090728/...FtYXNkcmVzc2Nv
Reply

Blackpool
07-28-2009, 10:41 AM
Originally Posted by Umm ul-Shaheed
yes, please...
No thanks. It's not going to happen. "Muslims" are dating white men/women at my work place. Some "muslim" girls are having sex with multiple men. There are muslims drinking alcohol after work. I see Asians blasting out music in their cars in Preston. It's a secular country and in my opinion it always will be. Secularism is growing at a much faster rate than any religion.
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
07-28-2009, 10:57 AM
Originally Posted by Thinker
Out of context - tut tut, naughty, very naughty:thumbs_do
very much in context...reread my post.
tut
tut

Originally Posted by Lost&Found
Gaza?
Fuc19tb3JlX2lzbGFtaWMEcG9zAzYEc2VjA3luX3BhZ2luYXRl X3N1bW1hcnlfbGlzdARzbGsDaGFtYXNkcmVzc2Nv[/url]
ill reply to that later, inshallah!

No thanks. It's not going to happen. "Muslims" are dating white men at my work place. Some "muslim" girls are having sex with multiple men. It's a secular country.
so? whose to say it cant change?
Reply

Blackpool
07-28-2009, 11:57 AM
Originally Posted by Umm ul-Shaheed

so? whose to say it cant change?
It's just not going to happen. In my opinion, Europe, especially Britain, is not the best of places to live for a muslim. It may not happen to you, perhaps not your kids but perhaps your grandchildren, you will see them being sucked into the culture of secularism. It is already happening. I don't agree with everything that happens here but I don't believe in being forced to follow the rules of a belief that isn't applicable to me.
Reply

Foxhole
07-28-2009, 12:03 PM
Originally Posted by Thinker
Those Muslims, who take the extremely or literal or fundamental interpretation of Islamic text to, for example, wear the niqab and not shake hands etc., how do they get around the Islamic text that commands that they not live in the land of the muskreen and are they wearing the niqab etc., because they feel guilty and hope that God will forgive them ignoring those commands that they don’t like?

(PS I am not asking the question to irritate you I’d really like to know the answer)
The answer is that, deep down, nobody wants the government telling them how to practice their faith. That's why many Muslims like to live in countries with secular legal systems. They are then free to practice as they wish.
Reply

Foxhole
07-28-2009, 12:23 PM
Originally Posted by Amadeus85
To be more specific You should say - secular liberal democracy (which is a typical english idea btw), because the classical (greek) democracy was theocratic, as the Greeks believed that the every power (also political) comes from their gods. But the system in which all elements of the Order (call it natural law or God's law) - religion,family,posession and justice - can be disputed, is a real mess system, which USA is a good example.
Which part of it is a mess? Is it the 200 years of uninterrupted peaceful transfers of power and respect for the voice of the electorate? Is it the religious freedoms enjoyed by all citizens (a direct result of church/state separation)? Is it the fact that decisions from US courts have provided guidance to the world's legal community for a century? Is it the absence of religious conflict within its borders throughout its history?

Where's the mess?

I'll show you a mess. Countries in which the government professes a religious belief. That's a good place to start - you can take it from there.
Reply

Tony
07-28-2009, 12:56 PM
Originally Posted by Foxhole
Which part of it is a mess? Is it the 200 years of uninterrupted peaceful transfers of power and respect for the voice of the electorate? Is it the religious freedoms enjoyed by all citizens (a direct result of church/state separation)? Is it the fact that decisions from US courts have provided guidance to the world's legal community for a century? Is it the absence of religious conflict within its borders throughout its history?

Where's the mess?

I'll show you a mess. Countries in which the government professes a religious belief. That's a good place to start - you can take it from there.
Like the acclaimed christianity of the USA for example ? The mess referred to is of drug abuse, mass fornication and its allowance and encouragement, religious conflict within and without its borders, who do u think are behind the Israeli persecutions who dou think funds the military there and there weapons such as white phospherous, I think u will find Mcdonalds, coke, disneyland etc etc. And the descisions u are so proud of making in US courts in my veiw are nothing but the dictation and bullying of a richer more powerful and covertly corrupt gvnment that has no right to be laying down the laws of other people. The turning away from religious belief within the state that you refer to is mereley a tactic to subdue people, let them spend their cash on self adulation and then we dont need to think of the [people in the world that could benefit from a beleif that states helping others is the best of thingsn we will keep the money in our hands and stuff the world. I think USA needs a radical change of heart as a whole
Reply

zakirs
07-28-2009, 01:05 PM
For me any country which doesn't allow is to pratice religion to fullest is not acceptable.but i would not wish sharia because as some other bro said , we cannot force our ideas.If there is a absolute majority , i would love to have sharia.For instance i guess sharia doesn't allow people eating pig.many people in my country eat it :|.

but i love my country for allowing me to practice my religion without any hinderances ,for providing holidays for my festivals and also arranging a seperate marriage code for muslims.(i.e India :) )
Reply

Ar-RaYYan
07-28-2009, 01:18 PM
Originally Posted by Thinker
You appear to have read something in my posts which is not there!
No Thinker the questions i asked was directly as result of your previous post. No more no less

1. How do I know that people aren’t in the process of making hijrah?
I didn’t say or infer that anyone in particular was not making hijrah but as the Muslim migrant population in the UK is increasing it is a reasonable assumption that vast majority are not leaving.
But that doesnt necessarily mean that some muslims are not making hijrah. Even if the muslim migrant population is increasing America and Britain should personally be responsible for it as those muslims tend to come from war zones -Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine

2. Why do you assume that a niqaabi or bearded brother automatically means they are immigrants?
I didn’t make that assumption – why do you assume that because God commanded that Muslims must make hijrah he meant solely those who came from a Muslim country. In fact, the only Muslim on this forum who has declared his intent to make hijrah is Dawuduk who (I believe) is a native British convert and who I applauded many times for his honesty and integrity in that regard. As we have not heard from him for some time I presume he is now somewhere in the Swat valley with his ‘brothers’.
No i didnt make the assumption that God commanded that only muslims from muslim countries should make a hijrah! where in my post did i state that?! in fact that is why i asked what the British should do about those native British reverts.

3. What do you suggest the British government should do about those who are born in the country- force them to go back to the country they were originally from?
No I most certainly do not and have never suggested any such action.
Well i have noticed from many of your posts asking why we (muslims) dont leave the land of the mushrekeen. Since you are asking that question im assuming you might have a solution for this problem of yours
4. More importantly what do you think the govt should do about those native British reverts?
I don’t suggest anything and they don’t suggest anything, on the other hand Islamic teachings does - it suggest ney God commands hijrah.
Frankly if you dont have any suggestions/solutions you shouldnt really moan about it.

5. Coventry road, bham has a large quantity of white British muslims than any other places in Birmingham and even in UK.
So?
Just making sure you got the facts right - we not only talking about muslim immigrants

You appear to have missed my point in raising this issue. The point was how do you reconcile the struggle by some to act out the letter of the text (and I gave examples like not shaking hands) but ignore commands (like hijrah) that you don’t like?
Who said we ignore or dislike commands like hijrah? The vast majority of muslims living in the west or any other non muslims countries would love to live in a muslim country. Making hijrah isnt simple as you would like to think.
Reply

Khalil_Allah
07-28-2009, 01:44 PM
Originally Posted by Foxhole
The answer is that, deep down, nobody wants the government telling them how to practice their faith. That's why many Muslims like to live in countries with secular legal systems. They are then free to practice as they wish.
We all have to agree with this. We don't want someone telling us how to practice Islam. We don't want people driving around enforcing practices of the sunnah. How many of you would take a whack for the length of your beard? :raging:

I suspect that the poster is wishing for law that imposes just punishments for crimes like adultery and alcohol consumption, and other parts of the shari'ah. She, like the rest of us, wants this crap out of our society and not tempting all of us who are trying to live by shari'ah.

But you know if Muslims were punished for this stuff in the US and England, there would be a lot of Muslims that would turn against Islam. There would be a lot of ayan hirsi's running around gaining support against Islam because they would be like "what is so wrong about my drinking? what is so wrong about having a boyfriend?" And of course all the non-Muslims would be like "yeah, she's right! Islam is messed up!" like they already do.

Living the shari'ah can't just be a top-down government-enforced sort of thing. Our Ummah is sick, and if I'm not mistaken, it will only get sicker and sicker until the end times. Isn't there something about how there will be times when even the name of Allah will be just a memory from grandparents?

Just do your part to live the shari'ah and teach it and be an example to your kids so that your lineage is not among those which lose the sweetness of righteousness. Teach them to be disgusted by the alcoholism and adultery and all of those things that are forbidden (but not by those who do these things!!!). You don't need a government or Medina-like society to do this.
Reply

Ummu Sufyaan
07-28-2009, 01:53 PM
In fact, the only Muslim on this forum who has declared his intent to make hijrah is Dawuduk who (I believe) is a native British convert and who I applauded many times for his honesty and integrity in that regard.
Muslims on this forum?! That's a silly presumption to make that she meant only Muslims on this forum. the Muslims on this forum make up a tiny proportion of us as a whole.

As we have not heard from him for some time I presume he is now somewhere in the Swat valley with his ‘brothers’.
cool


put words being used in a smart way with the general public being so naive and you'll get things blown out of proportion and have the world making mountains out of molehills, as has been done here.

Do half these things even matter if they haven’t been presented in the context they have been? I think not! What a pathetic attempt at undermining Palestinian resistance.

Israel controls Gaza..anything that goes in and out of it is under her rule...including the media--->do the math, it isnt that hard.
Reply

O2K
07-28-2009, 03:41 PM
Originally Posted by Foxhole
Which part of it is a mess? Is it the 200 years of uninterrupted peaceful transfers of power and respect for the voice of the electorate? Is it the religious freedoms enjoyed by all citizens (a direct result of church/state separation)? Is it the fact that decisions from US courts have provided guidance to the world's legal community for a century? Is it the absence of religious conflict within its borders throughout its history?

Where's the mess?

I'll show you a mess. Countries in which the government professes a religious belief. That's a good place to start - you can take it from there.
200 years of peaceful transfer? are you talking about internal peace? as in no rebellions? no military intervention internally? you post is full of generalizations and vaguaties. please explain.
Reply

Ansariyah
07-28-2009, 03:51 PM
These get as Islamic as it gets without a Khalifah:

Mauritania
Indonasia
Birmingham
Reply

Foxhole
07-28-2009, 04:42 PM
Originally Posted by O2K
200 years of peaceful transfer? are you talking about internal peace?
yes

Originally Posted by O2K
as in no rebellions?
yes

Originally Posted by O2K
no military intervention internally?
yes
Reply

O2K
07-28-2009, 05:34 PM
Originally Posted by Foxhole
yes



yes



yes

Well. As far as a transfer of peaceful power, that typically has more to do with the people than it does the system. A nation could have tyrant after tyrant with a peaceful transfer. When the transfer of power goes wrong, it has little to do with the system itself and has more to do with the people.

There have been many, many, many rebellions in US history, along with internal military interventsions (see battle of blair mountain, citrus wars). America's number one problem is labor. The labor system is amazing skewed. Not to mention the wealth disparity. The Gini Efficient in America has risen a whole 10% in 40 years. That is a ridiculous number. To say that the system in America is a success is false as one could say that the system started to change in 1913, and then really made an impact after WW2. The American system as we know it really has only been in place for a few decades, not 2 centuries. the 19th century US system is not the same as the 20th century and 21st century US system.
Reply

Foxhole
07-28-2009, 06:31 PM
Originally Posted by O2K
Well. As far as a transfer of peaceful power, that typically has more to do with the people than it does the system. A nation could have tyrant after tyrant with a peaceful transfer. When the transfer of power goes wrong, it has little to do with the system itself and has more to do with the people.
I suppose it could. In bizarro universe. (A dictator passing leadership to his son is obviously not a "transfer of power".)

Can you give me one example of a transfer of power in a non-democratic system in which violence was not used?

Originally Posted by O2K
There have been many, many, many rebellions in US history, along with internal military interventsions (see battle of blair mountain, citrus wars). America's number one problem is labor. The labor system is amazing skewed. Not to mention the wealth disparity. The Gini Efficient in America has risen a whole 10% in 40 years. That is a ridiculous number. To say that the system in America is a success is false as one could say that the system started to change in 1913, and then really made an impact after WW2. The American system as we know it really has only been in place for a few decades, not 2 centuries. the 19th century US system is not the same as the 20th century and 21st century US system.
When I meant insurrections and intervention, I meant groups seeking to take governing power through violence, something that is the norm in non-democratic countries (since that's the only way to assume power.)

Of course there has been occasional violence from labor disputes, social strife, etc. But the system is and always has been respected as the only means of assuming governing power.
Reply

Muslimlearner
07-28-2009, 06:44 PM
Gaza?!

Do you belive there is a punishment on the dunia?

Gaza,Irak,Iran........
Reply

Lost&Found
07-28-2009, 06:45 PM
Originally Posted by Umm ul-Shaheed
put words being used in a smart way with the general public being so naive and you'll get things blown out of proportion and have the world making mountains out of molehills, as has been done here.

Do half these things even matter if they haven’t been presented in the context they have been? I think not! What a pathetic attempt at undermining Palestinian resistance.

Israel controls Gaza..anything that goes in and out of it is under her rule...including the media--->do the math, it isnt that hard.
What points in the article don't you agree with?
Reply

O2K
07-28-2009, 07:05 PM
Originally Posted by Foxhole
I suppose it could. In bizarro universe. (A dictator passing leadership to his son is obviously not a "transfer of power".)

Can you give me one example of a transfer of power in a non-democratic system in which violence was not used?
Off the top of my head- from Abu Bakr RA to Umar RA. Also off the top of my head the transition from the Shang Dynasty to the Chou Dynasty if I remember correctly went by relatively smoothly.

[Quote}

When I meant insurrections and intervention, I meant groups seeking to take governing power through violence, something that is the norm in non-democratic countries (since that's the only way to assume power.)

Of course there has been occasional violence from labor disputes, social strife, etc. But the system is and always has been respected as the only means of assuming governing power. [/QUOTE]


What do you call lobbying? Corporations? The Military Industrial Complex? America is not a democracy, it is a Corporate Oligarchy. The argument of a democracy is a farce considering there is no democratic (by definition) country in the world. While it has been relatively peaceful, one could say that is due to the control of the government over the population. In theory, a free population would lead to chaos. Like I said before, the system that is in place today, is not the same in the 19th century.
Reply

GuestFellow
07-28-2009, 07:09 PM
Originally Posted by Foxhole

Where's the mess?

I'll show you a mess. Countries in which the government professes a religious belief. That's a good place to start - you can take it from there.
Some of the mess has been created due to interference of other countries. Not all countries are perfect. Every country internally has different problems of their own.

I wonder if people who critique other countries really care to see that country rise to stability or just want to be given an opportunity to appear superior.
Reply

Ar-RaYYan
07-28-2009, 07:26 PM
Originally Posted by Blackpool
No thanks. It's not going to happen. "Muslims" are dating white men/women at my work place. Some "muslim" girls are having sex with multiple men. There are muslims drinking alcohol after work. I see Asians blasting out music in their cars in Preston. It's a secular country and in my opinion it always will be. Secularism is growing at a much faster rate than any religion.
and anomic society within secularism is growing even faster. As people increasingly will feel sense of isolation, loss of identity and confusion they will turn to religion which they feel will provide sense of purpose
Reply

O2K
07-28-2009, 07:33 PM
Originally Posted by Ar-RaYYan
and anomic society within secularism is growing even faster. As people increasingly will feel sense of isolation, loss of identity and confusion they will turn to religion which they feel will provide sense of purpose
this is very brief yet could be very accurate for History repeats itself
Reply

GuestFellow
07-28-2009, 07:35 PM
Originally Posted by Ar-RaYYan
and anomic society within secularism is growing even faster. As people increasingly will feel sense of isolation, loss of identity and confusion they will turn to religion which they feel will provide sense of purpose
Yes that does appear to be the case. In the UK there are many teenagers who are depressed and this secular lifestyle to some extent has what caused these teenagers to be upset and unmotivated. Working at Birmingham Children Hospital, I spoke to some paediatrics/doctors and they told me some patients as young as eight and seven were suffering from depression or are at a significant risk. Every year teenagers have committed suicide. There are cases of child abuse, where parents cannot even look after their own children.

This is what I call a mess, and this secular lifestyle to some extent does not provide structure to these people's lives. Yes there are other factors that has contributed to this mess, but in the UK...a developed country and a very wealthy country, why are we even in this mess?

Why hasn't secularism solved all of our problems?
Reply

Foxhole
07-28-2009, 08:08 PM
Originally Posted by O2K
What do you call lobbying?
You're suggesting that people not have the right to petition the government?

Originally Posted by O2K
Corporations?
You're suggesting that people not have the right to form collective private business enterprises?

Originally Posted by O2K
The Military Industrial Complex?
You're suggesting that the military not spend money in the private sector?

Originally Posted by O2K
America is not a democracy, it is a Corporate Oligarchy.
I guess. Care to speculate on why the Oligarchs chose to evict Bush and bring in Barack?

Originally Posted by O2K
The argument of a democracy is a farce considering there is no democratic (by definition) country in the world.
I'm guessing that your definition of democracy is something that is not possible, right?

Originally Posted by O2K
While it has been relatively peaceful, one could say that is due to the control of the government over the population.
True. Or one could say, with equal accuracy, "rabbit have antlers."

Originally Posted by O2K
In theory, a free population would lead to chaos.
That's a good one, Fearless Leader. I sure hope the Oligarchs put you in office some day.


Seriously, dude. You have to lay off the Chomsky.

So, after all that criticism of democracy, I assume you can tell us of a system of choosing and maintaining a government that's better.
Reply

Foxhole
07-28-2009, 08:13 PM
Originally Posted by Ar-RaYYan
and anomic society within secularism is growing even faster. As people increasingly will feel sense of isolation, loss of identity and confusion they will turn to religion which they feel will provide sense of purpose
Fortunately, they're free to do that in societies with secular legal systems. And, best of all, they get to explore and choose the religion of their choice! Maybe that's not a good thing ...
Reply

O2K
07-28-2009, 08:32 PM
Originally Posted by Foxhole
You're suggesting that people not have the right to petition the government?
haha lobbying is far from "petitioning" the government. I don't think i need to go into the details of the danger of lobbying. I'm sure you already know that. If you don't, it shouldn't be so hard to looking into article 22 if I'm not mistaken of the Federalist Papers.


You're suggesting that people not have the right to form collective private business enterprises?
Not if it means dictating the laws of the people

You're suggesting that the military not spend money in the private sector?
I'm suggesting military not turn into a business. Dwight D Eisenhower right now is rolling over in his grave

I guess. Care to speculate on why the Oligarchs chose to evict Bush and bring in Barack?
now tell me, what has Obama done that is much different than Bush? I guess instead of the military sector he gave power to Wall Street and Financial services.

I'm guessing that your definition of democracy is something that is not possible, right?
de⋅moc⋅ra⋅cy  /dɪˈmɒkrəsi/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [di-mok-ruh-see] –noun, plural -cies. 1. government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them

Not quite what we have here


You have to lay off the Chomsky.
Personally I'm not a big fan of Chomsky, but I'd rather digest some Noam than good ole' everyday news.
Reply

aamirsaab
07-28-2009, 08:34 PM
Originally Posted by Foxhole
Fortunately, they're free to do that in societies with secular legal systems. And, best of all, they get to explore and choose the religion of their choice! Maybe that's not a good thing ...
They can do that LEGALLY in an islamic country too. Just don't start attacking the city (i.e committing treason) after you apostacise and everyone is happy. Which is the same in any country regardless of it's religions roots or lack there of.
Reply

Ar-RaYYan
07-28-2009, 08:55 PM
Originally Posted by Foxhole
Fortunately, they're free to do that in societies with secular legal systems. And, best of all, they get to explore and choose the religion of their choice! Maybe that's not a good thing ...
They are free to do that in majority of societies that exist today including islamic ones but that doesnt mean they will find the real purpose. Anywas since you believe that secular society will provide people with sense of purpose and sense of belonging care to explain why those society tend to have the highest rate of suicide or depression for example.
Reply

Thinker
07-29-2009, 12:40 PM
Originally Posted by Ar-RaYYan
Who said we ignore or dislike commands like hijrah? The vast majority of muslims living in the west or any other non muslims countries would love to live in a muslim country. Making hijrah isnt simple as you would like to think.
Making hijrah isn’t simple as you would like to think. . . . . . .Of course it’s not, it’s much easier for Muslims to leave the 'difficulties' of day to day life in dar al-Islam and emigrate to the lands of opportunity which are dar al-kafir. . . . . . I think you have agreed with the point I was making. That being that of the tendency for Muslims living in the west to go to extreme lengths to follow some obscure and questionable aspect of the sunnah whilst ignoring other commands from God because those commands are ‘too difficult’ and hoping that in doing that God will mitigate their lack of adherence to those ‘difficult’ commands. Only they and God know why it is difficult and whether the degree of difficulty is an acceptable reason for failing the command. Would a persons dependence on the comforts, security and stability available in the west be good enough reason not to make hijrah?
Reply

Thinker
07-29-2009, 12:46 PM
Originally Posted by Umm ul-Shaheed
you mean your other statements were intended to irritate us?
Clearly my posts have irritated you and for that I apologies as that is not my intention (although I have to admit that I am sometimes intrigued by what does irritate).

I won’t waste my time trying to recruit you onto my list of Facebook friends or get my name back onto your Christmas card list imsad although you have a poor opinion of me I quite like you :statisfie
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 60
    Last Post: 08-19-2016, 03:57 AM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-28-2008, 05:45 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-12-2006, 10:58 AM
  4. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-09-2006, 10:47 AM
  5. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-14-2005, 01:02 PM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!