PDA

View Full Version : Lina Joy



Amadeus85
05-28-2007, 08:04 PM
Christian Convert Fights Malaysian Law
By EILEEN NG 05.27.07, 1:38 PM ET





Lina Joy has been disowned by her family, shunned by friends and forced into hiding - all because she renounced Islam and embraced Christianity in Muslim-majority Malaysia.

Now, after a seven-year legal struggle, Malaysia's highest court will decide on Wednesday whether her constitutional right to choose her religion overrides an Islamic law that prohibits Malay Muslims from leaving Islam.

Either way, the verdict will have profound implications on society in a country where Islam is increasingly conflicting with minority religions, challenging Malaysia's reputation as a moderate Muslim and multicultural nation that guarantees freedom of worship.

Joy's case began in 1998 when, after converting, she applied for a name change on her government identity card. The National Registration Department obliged but refused to drop Muslim from the religion column.

She appealed the decision to a civil court but was told she must take it to Islamic Shariah courts. But Joy, 42, has argued that she should not be bound by Shariah law because she is a Christian.

Subsequent appeals all ruled that the Shariah court should decide the case until it reached the highest court, the Federal Court, which will make the final decision on whether Muslims who renounce their faith must still answer to the country's Islamic courts.

About 60 percent of Malaysia's 26 million people are Malay Muslims, whose civil, family, marriage and personal rights are decided by Shariah courts. The minorities - the ethnic Chinese, Indians and other smaller communities - are governed by civil courts.

But the constitution does not say who has the final say in cases such as Joy's when Islam confronts Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism or other religions.

If Joy loses her appeal and continues to insist she is a Christian, it could lead to charges of apostasy and a possible jail sentence.

"Our country is at a crossroad," Joy's lawyer, Benjamin Dawson, told The Associated Press. "Are we evolving into an Islamic state or are we going to maintain the secular character of the constitution?"

The founding fathers of Malaysia left the constitution deliberately vague, unwilling to upset any of the three ethnic groups dominant at the time of independence from Britain 50 years ago, when building a peaceful multiracial nation was more important.

The situation was muddied further with the constitution describing Malaysia as a secular state but recognizing Islam as the official religion.

Joy's case "will decide the space of religious freedom in Malaysia," said Dawson. If she wins, "it means that the constitutionally guaranteed right of freedom of religion prevails. If she loses, that means the constitutional guarantee is subservient to Islamic restrictions," he said.

Joy's decision to leave Islam sparked angry street protests by Muslim groups and led to e-mail death threats against Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, a Muslim lawyer supporting her. The widely circulated anonymous e-mail described him as a "traitor" to Islam and carried his picture with the caption "Wanted Dead."

Proselytizing of Muslims is banned in Malaysia and apostasy is regarded a crime punishable by fines and jail sentences. Offenders are often sent to prison-like rehabilitation centers.

Many Islamic nations have similar laws. Saudi Arabia neither permits conversion from Islam nor allows other religions in the kingdom. The case of an Afghan man who faced the death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity caused an outcry in the United States and other nations, and Afghanistan released him.

Even Jordan, considered one of the most tolerant countries in the Middle East, convicted a Muslim man for converting to Christianity several years ago, taking away his right to work and annulling his marriage.

By law, all Malays have to be Muslim and few convert. Those who do prefer to keep it quiet.

Some seek legal approval for their action, but civil courts invariably refer the case back to the Shariah courts.

Joy was born Azlina Jailani and began going to church in 1990. She was baptized eight years later. She then applied for the changes to her identity card.

When authorities refused her request to drop Muslim from the religion designation, Joy went to the High Court in May 2000 but was told to go to Shariah courts. She challenged the decision in the Court of Appeal but lost, and took it to Malaysia's highest court in 2005.

The hearing in Federal Court ended in July 2006, but it has taken the judges until now to declare a verdict, saying a careful examination was necessary because of the sensitivity of the case.

Meanwhile, Joy has been disowned by her family and forced to quit her computer sales job after clients threatened to withdraw their business. Joy and her ethnic Indian Catholic boyfriend, known only as Johnson, went into hiding early 2006 amid fears they could be targeted by Muslim zealots, Dawson said.

"Lina is very steadfast in her belief. She is aware that her chances (of winning) are slim but is putting her faith in God. She is just an ordinary Malaysian girl who wants to lead an ordinary life."

Joy has never made any public appearances and has rejected requests for interviews.

In a sworn statement to a lower court in 2000, she said she felt "more peace in my spirit and soul after having become a Christian."

Muslim groups, however, say Joy is questioning the position of Islam by taking the case to the civil courts.

"It is not about one person, it is about challenging the Islamic system in Malaysia," said Muslim Youth Movement President Yusri Mohammad, who set up a coalition of 80 Islamic groups to oppose Joy's case.

"By doing this openly, she is encouraging others to do the same. It may open the floodgates to other Muslims because once it is a precedent, it becomes an option."

If Joy wins her case, he warned, it could rend Malaysia's multiracial fabric by fomenting Muslim anger against minorities, who have largely lived in peace with Malays. There has been no racial violence in the country since the May 1969 Malay-Chinese riots that killed dozens.

Dawson said several apostasy cases are on hold in the civil courts, pending a verdict in Joy's case.

"Both the man in the street and lawyers want to know once and for all how to draw the line between civil and Shariah courts - whether Muslims can convert and if yes, what are the procedures," he said.


http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/...ap3761905.html
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Amadeus85
05-28-2007, 09:20 PM
What are your opinions about that?
Reply

Umar001
05-28-2007, 09:37 PM
Howdy Aaron,

Originally Posted by Aaron85
What are your opinions about that?
Well, I do wonder what this thread will be good for. Out of curiosity, are our opinions the reason for the thread?

Other than that, I think its pretty amazing, at least she is Christian so she believes that if she dies or goes prison she'll be in heaven or something and I mean she'd have some hope in a next life.

As for the 'Islamic state' and 'Tolerant Country' and so forth, I wonder if Muslims will take into this 'either/or' mentality or not.

As for her personally, then it would be nice to speak to her, see her views, inquire, (last time I said this someone thought I mean I'd capture her, no no dont think I'd do that) ask why and so forth, but in the end I wouldn't be suprised.

Eesa
Reply

Keltoi
05-28-2007, 09:42 PM
This goes back to compulsion in religion. Is she free to choose whether she wants to be Muslim or not?
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
- Qatada -
05-28-2007, 09:48 PM
I'll quote bro Ansar:


:sl:

In order to understand this issue, we need to examine the Islamic law on apostasy. Since religion is looked on as a personal affair in western society, the notion of state intervention in one's personal choice would naturally seem excessive. However, from the Islamic perspective, a number of points must be observed with regard to apostasy:
1. Islam has never compelled anyone to accept the religion. Anyone who becomes a Muslim does so purely through objective study of the religion. As Allah has informed us in the Qur'an:

2:256 There is no compulsion in religion.
10:99 So would you (O Muhammad) then compel people to become believers?


Likewise, Islam encourages its followers to reflect and contemplate upon the universe around us and to ponder over the beauty of the Qur'anic message:

47:24 Do they not ponder over the Qur'an or are their hearts locked up?

51:20-21. And on earth are signs for those endowed with inner-certainty; and [likewise there are signs] in yourselves, do you not observe?

29:20 Say: "Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all things.


Thus, Islam requires that one's faith be constructed upon logical investigation and study of the universe in which we live. Through logical contemplation, one realizes the supreme authority of the Creator and the veracity of Muhammad's (saws) claim to prophethood. Thus we find that, in the history of Islam, no knowledgeable Muslim has ever left Islam. The only cases we find of former Muslims are people who were never practicing Muslims in the first place, nor did they ever have a good understanding of Islam. Yet on the other hand, the list of educated converts to Islam is immense, and it includes educated leaders such as priests, rabbis and atheists.

2. Those who have left Islam have historically fallen under three categories: those who left having never properly understood the religion often due to social circumstances, those who faked a conversion into Islam in order to undermine the Islamic community from within, and those who left to support opposing forces in battle against the Muslims. Because of the first category, Islam requires that the person who has chosen to forsake the religion be consulted with in order that his doubts may be clarified to him if there is any specific issue of confusion, or so that he may learn the proper Islamic teachings that he may otherwise have not been exposed to. As for the second and third category, this was the original reason behind the Prophet's statement on apostasy. The Qur'an records (3:72) that the Jews of Madinah decided to initiate the practice of pretending to accept Islam and then publicly declare their rejection of it, so as to destroy the confidence of the newly-converted Muslims. Thus, the Prophet Muhammad pbuh ruled that a punishment should be announced so that those who decide to accept Islam do so because of a firm conviction not in order to harm the Muslim community from within.

3. Coming to the actual law of apostasy, the Prophet Muhammad pbuh did say, in the above historical context, "Whoever replaces his religion, execute him" (Bukhari, Abu Dawud) but how exactly do we understand this statement and does it conflict with the principles of freedom? The Prophet Muhammad pbuh himself clarified this statement in another hadith narrated in Sahih Muslim where he mentioned that the one who was to be fought against was the one who "abandons his religion and the Muslim community". It should be noted that every country has maintained punishments, including execution, for treason and rebellion against the state (See Mozley and Whitley's Law Dictionary, under "Treason and Treason Felony," pp. 368-369). Islam is not just a set of beliefs, it is a complete system of life which includes a Muslim's allegiance to the Islamic state. Thus, a rejection against that would be akin to treason. Rebellion against God is more serious than rebellion against one's country. However, one who personally abandons the faith and leaves the country would not be hunted down and assassinated, nor would one who remains inside the state conforming to outward laws be tracked down and executed. The notion of establishing inquisition courts to determine peoples' faith, as done in the Spanish Inquisition, is something contrary to Islamic law. As illustrated by the historical context in which it was mandated, the death penalty is mainly for those who collaborate with enemy forces in order to aid them in their attacks against the Islamic state or for those who seek to promote civil unrest and rebellion from within the Islamic state. When someone publicly announces their rejection of Islam within an Islamic state it is basically a challenge to the Islamic government, since such an individual can keep it to themselves like the personal affair it is made out to be.

4. From Islamic history, we can gain a better understanding of how this law has been implemented. Although the Prophet Muhammad pbuh threatened the death penalty in response to the attempts against the Muslim community, no such executions took place in his time (Imam Shawkani, Nayl Al-Awtar, vol. 7, p. 192) even though there is a report that a Bedouin renounced Islam and left Madinah unharmed in his time (Fath Al-Bari vol. 4, p.77 and vol. 13 p. 170; Sahih Muslim biSharh An-Nawawi, vol. 9, p. 391). Thus, we find that context plays an important role in determining how to deal with apostates. The case of one who enlists nations to fight against the Islamic state is more serious, for example. That is why the scholars of the Hanafi school of thought felt that the punishment only applies to the male apostate and not the female apostate because the latter is unable to wage war against the Islamic state. If someone simply has some doubts concerning Islam, then those doubts can be clarified.
So an Islamic state is certainly justified in punishing those who betray the state, committing treason and support enemy forces. As for anyone else, if they do not publicly declare their rejection of Islam, the state has no interest in pursuing them; if their case does become public, however, then they should be reasoned with and educated concerning the religion so that they have the opportunity to learn the concepts they may not have understood properly and they can be encouraged to repent.

From another of my posts:
Originally Posted by Ansar Al-'Adl
Originally Posted by blunderbus
If a predominantly Christian country were going to execute a former Christian who converted to another religion (in this hypothetical case, Islam) would you be ok with that?
As a side note, this has already happened, examples include the spanish inquisition. But on to your question...

First of all, the law on apostasy has been explained here and here. It is commonly taken out of context, but the point to note is that the Prophet Muhammad (saws) clarified that the one to be punished was the one who rebelled against the community. This is quite similar to state laws on treason. A state is justified in taking action against those who pose a significant threat. But the idea of setting up an inquisition to examine the beliefs of the people is against Islamic teachings, so someone who personally changes their religious convictions will be insignificant in the eyes of the state. It is the one who publically announces his rebellion, stirring civil unrest, who must be opposed. While the Christian inquisitions were bent on examining (through the use of torture) the beliefs of those Muslims and Jews who outwardly professed conversion to Christianity, in an Islamic state, someone who even outwardly professes acceptane of Islam is left alone because they cause no harm to society, and the Islamic state is only interested in the security of its society.

If someone poses a threat to a state's security, then they are justified in taking action against them. But if someone changes their personal religious views, then it is quite extreme for the state to attempt to pry into the hearts of its citizens to determine their faith and punish them.
:w:

_______

Material from this post has been added to this article:
http://www.load-islam.com/artical_de...conceptions#28
Reply

Umar001
05-28-2007, 09:52 PM
Come on, we must by now get the jist of compulsion and apostacy in Islaam.

There are threads on that.

If the only point of this is to see the views on apostacy and laws in islam then maybe we can take it to one of those threads?
Reply

Amadeus85
05-28-2007, 09:52 PM
Originally Posted by Al Habeshi
Howdy Aaron,



Well, I do wonder what this thread will be good for. Out of curiosity, are our opinions the reason for the thread?


Eesa

Yes, they are. I want to know, if you agree that she should or should not have the right to leave islam and choose christianity.

I think that this thread wasnt posted before on IslamicBoard.
Reply

Amadeus85
05-28-2007, 09:55 PM
Originally Posted by Al Habeshi
Come on, we must by now get the jist of compulsion and apostacy in Islaam.

There are threads on that.

If the only point of this is to see the views on apostacy and laws in islam then maybe we can take it to one of those threads?
No no, i dont wanna hear quotes from islamic law, i just want to know your own opinion about this particalar situation.

Should Lina Joy have right to leave islam in Malaysia, or not.

Thats all.

Thanks for approving my thread folks :D
Reply

- Qatada -
05-28-2007, 09:56 PM
Referring to that question, would she have the right to leave christianity and become Muslim?


Because there are verses from the bible which state otherwise.
Reply

Chuck
05-28-2007, 09:57 PM
Originally Posted by Aaron85
Yes, they are. I want to know, if you agree that she should or should not have the right to leave islam and choose christianity.

I think that this thread wasnt posted before on IslamicBoard.
A female's apostasy is not considered treason according to Hanafi school.
Reply

Umar001
05-28-2007, 09:58 PM
Originally Posted by Aaron85
No no, i dont wanna hear quotes from islamic law, i just want to know your own opinion about this particalar situation.

Should Lina Joy have right to leave islam in Malaysia, or not.

Thats all.

Thanks for approving my thread folks :D
You do realise a Muslim's opinion should be the Islamic Law right?

So my answer or opion is what the Islamic law is.
Reply

Sami Zaatari
05-28-2007, 09:59 PM
Originally Posted by Aaron85
No no, i dont wanna hear quotes from islamic law, i just want to know your own opinion about this particalar situation.

Should Lina Joy have right to leave islam in Malaysia, or not.

Thats all.

Thanks for approving my thread folks :D
ill base my opinion on your culture, no, she doesnt, such as in ww1 and ww2 traitors would be killed, hence ill base my opinion as i said on your culture. thank you.
Reply

Amadeus85
05-28-2007, 10:02 PM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
Referring to that question, would she have the right to leave christianity and become Muslim?


Because there are verses from the bible which state otherwise.
In my own opinion she should definitely have the right to leave christianity and embrace islam if she wanted to.
Reply

Amadeus85
05-28-2007, 10:04 PM
Originally Posted by Sami Zaatari
ill base my opinion on your culture, no, she doesnt, such as in ww1 and ww2 traitors would be killed, hence ill base my opinion as i said on your culture. thank you.
But how is she a traitor? Is there a war now in Malaysia? And what about " no compulsion in religion" ?
Reply

Umar001
05-28-2007, 10:06 PM
Are we now gonna take no compulsion in religion from our own Tafsirs or the way of the Prophet? peace be upon him.

This is all it kind of boils down to I guess, why should she be killed or imprisoned.

Why this and so forth which would be better suited for the other threads.

Maybe she should just leave the country or not get her name changed, if she's a Christian.
Reply

- Qatada -
05-28-2007, 10:08 PM
Originally Posted by Aaron85
In my own opinion she should definitely have the right to leave christianity and embrace islam if she wanted to.

But that wouldn't be the right thing to do if it went against your religion right?

Deuteronomy
Chapter 13
KJV

1 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, 2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; 3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 Ye shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him. 5 And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee.

6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; 7 Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth; 8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: 9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. 10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage. 11 And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you.

I know you dont have the intention of attacking Islaam, but i just want to clarify that it's not only Islaam.



We follow our religion whole-heartedly, and if something goes against that - then we take God and His Messenger's command over our view. Since God has more knowledge than us, and He is the All Wise, All Knowing.


PS: You might also find this beneficial: Apostasy and the Freedom of Religion




Regards.
Reply

Amadeus85
05-28-2007, 10:14 PM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah


[/INDENT]I know you dont have the intention of attacking Islaam, but i just want to clarify that it's not only Islaam.





Regards.

Yes, i don't. I am just interested in this particular situation which i am interested from many reasons. :)

Anyway thnx for help.
Reply

Trumble
05-28-2007, 10:24 PM
Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah
Referring to that question, would she have the right to leave christianity and become Muslim?

Because there are verses from the bible which state otherwise.
Whatever verses from the Bible might say (and verses from the OT rather than the NT are hardly relevant in that context anyway), name one 'Christian' country where the same thing would happen if someone converted from Christianity to Islam?

Any law that prevents freedom of choice in religion is to be condemned. There is no 'cultural' excuse for one, or many, persons to attempt to deny religious freedom and choice to another.
Reply

Amadeus85
05-28-2007, 10:30 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble
Whatever verses from the Bible might say, name one 'Christian' country where the same thing would happen if someone converted from Christianity to Islam?

Any law that prevents freedom of choice in religion is to be condemned. There is no 'cultural' excuse for one, or many, persons to attempt to deny religious freedom and choice to another.
Thats it! You expressed my own thoughts very well.

Its true that in christian countries ( or with christian majority) it never happens that a convert to islam( former christian) is threaten a jail or has to fight for his rights in courts.

Just imagine, if Lina Joy was a christian living in Holland for example, and after she converts to islam, she would have the same troubles as has the woman in Malaysia now, dozens of islamic organizations would condemn this act and cry about islamophobic and racist Europe. :) Sounds like double standards.
Reply

wilberhum
05-28-2007, 10:41 PM
Originally Posted by Trumble
Whatever verses from the Bible might say (and verses from the OT rather than the NT are hardly relevant in that context anyway), name one 'Christian' country where the same thing would happen if someone converted from Christianity to Islam?

Any law that prevents freedom of choice in religion is to be condemned. There is no 'cultural' excuse for one, or many, persons to attempt to deny religious freedom and choice to another.
In my opinion, anyone that would harm another for making a personnel choice, conceders themselves superior. In a society of equals, they are the apostates because they deny equality.
Reply

Umar001
05-28-2007, 10:41 PM
Originally Posted by Aaron85
Thats it! You expressed my own thoughts very well.

Its true that in christian countries ( or with christian majority) it never happens that a convert to islam( former christian) is threaten a jail or has to fight for his rights in courts.

Just imagine, if Lina Joy was a christian living in Holland for example, and after she converts to islam, she would have the same troubles as has the woman in Malaysia now, dozens of islamic organizations would condemn this act and cry about islamophobic and racist Europe. :) Sounds like double standards.
Well in reality if a person lived in such a country and became Muslim they could just leave, its called hijra. Something this lady maybe shoulda done.

And if someone told me, renounce islam or die, I think I'd prefer to die, and I am sure the lady would do the same.

At least both Muslms and Christians acknowledge that God in the past has sent laws to punish those that left His religion. :)

But I would say one thing, double standards? Hmm maybe, but from what I understand muslims tend to use what is available, for example, Europe might go by a set of laws, so the muslim who lives here tries to abide by them, thus he would appeal and so forth, and when that muslim lives in the muslim abiding areas he abides by them and that's it.

It's a simple matter of adjusting to surroundings.

Originally Posted by wilberhum
In my opinion, anyone that would harm another for making a personnel choice, conceders themselves superior. In a society of equals, they are the apostates because they deny equality.
I think that might in alot of cases work both ways, meaning the apostates in an equal society would themselves be indirectly saying that they are making a better descion and so forth, specially when entering faiths like Judaism, Christianity or Islam.
Reply

Amadeus85
05-28-2007, 10:53 PM
Originally Posted by Al Habeshi
But I would say one thing, double standards? Hmm maybe, but from what I understand muslims tend to use what is available, for example, Europe might go by a set of laws, so the muslim who lives here tries to abide by them, thus he would appeal and so forth, and when that muslim lives in the muslim abiding areas he abides by them and that's it.

It's a simple matter of adjusting to surroundings.
If its true what you say, then how democracy can work in muslim countries, while freedom of religion is the major case of democracy?

You know for me it is quite disturbing, because we still talk about moderate and democratic Malaysia, not about Iran , or Afghanistan.

And about muslims abiding european laws in Europe...Dont actually muslims in EUROPE fight to impose their religious laws in our continent?
For example- all those Halal dishes in schools, seperated swimming pools for boys and girls in Great Britain, muslim places to worship in jails and police stations, hospitals for muslims only..

I think that if Malaysia wants to call itself a democratic country, it should leave that woman alone. And please dont tell me that she can leave this country, because we dont expell converts to islam from Europe (we rather show them in tv and magazines).
Reply

Umar001
05-28-2007, 11:00 PM
Originally Posted by Aaron85
If its true what you say, then how democracy can work in muslim countries, while freedom of religion is the major case of democracy?
Many things work in many places, whether some Muslims want an islamic state or not that's what it boils down to.


Originally Posted by Aaron85
And about muslims abiding european laws in Europe...Dont actually muslims in EUROPE fight to impose their religious laws in our continent?
Maybe because the Laws of your Continent allow them to?


Originally Posted by Aaron85
For example- all those Halal dishes in schools, seperated swimming pools for boys and girls in Great Britain, muslim places to worship in jails and police stations, hospitals for muslims only..
If someone gives you the option of making things easier for yourself would you take it? I would, if someone gave me the option between serving my kids halal food or having to go out of my way because they dont serve halal food, I'd prefer the former.

Originally Posted by Aaron85
I think that if Malaysia wants to call itself a democratic country, it should leave that woman alone. And please dont tell me that she can leave this country, because we dont expell converts to islam from Europe (we rather show them in tv and magazines).
Well that's upto malaysia and its people.

As for leaving, well i was just stating that some would derive that teaching from the words in the Bible, she might be one of those Christians who does, would be good if she did.

As for the comparison, well that's your law, you can keep it if you wish. But I don't see much point in comparing the two. ;)
Reply

Amadeus85
05-28-2007, 11:08 PM
Originally Posted by Al Habeshi
.

As for the comparison, well that's your law, you can keep it if you wish. But I don't see much point in comparing the two. ;)
Ok but then someone could ask how islamic law can co exist with western democracy. And how should look like the integration of muslim immigrants in West. And finally, isn't actually islamic law and western democracy too different from each other.

Ok im going to sleep now anyway, because i have to wake up early to my university :laugh:

Bye.
Reply

wilberhum
05-28-2007, 11:14 PM
Originally Posted by Aaron85
Ok but then someone could ask how islamic law can co exist with western democracy. And how should look like the integration of muslim immigrants in West. And finally, isn't actually islamic law and western democracy too different from each other.

Ok im going to sleep now anyway, because i have to wake up early to my university :laugh:

Bye.
Co exist? I assume you mean co-exits in equality. For that to happen, people must conceder themselves equal. As long an one demands superiority, true co-existence is not possible.
Reply

Umar001
05-28-2007, 11:17 PM
Originally Posted by Aaron85
Ok but then someone could ask how islamic law can co exist with western democracy. And how should look like the integration of muslim immigrants in West. And finally, isn't actually islamic law and western democracy too different from each other.
Well then one asks do they need to co exist, one could also ask do they need to intergrate.

You see, God's will on earth as it is in heaven, is, in my view, brought to life through the establishment of His laws, including the Shariah, so thus, just as you would not want heaven/paradise to be half God's law Half Man's similarly, I want God's law here as it is and will be in heaving, i.e. his command superior.

As for the intergration, I am here, doing ok, as long as I can practice my religion I do my bit, I pay taxes, I work, I study, I dont steal nor break laws.

Originally Posted by Aaron85
Ok im going to sleep now anyway, because i have to wake up early to my university :laugh:

Bye.
Take care dude, but you not on a break? Half term whooohooo.
Reply

syilla
05-29-2007, 12:34 AM
http://www.islamicboard.com/general-...rspective.html
Reply

syilla
05-29-2007, 12:36 AM
Can A Child Really ‘Convert’ to Islam?

Dr. Syed Ali Tawfik Al-Attas/ Md. Asham bin Ahmad
Ketua Pengarah/ Fellow

01/05/2007 | The Star


....The emphasis on will and consciousness, when talking about Islam, assumes knowledge to be of paramount prerequisite. Knowledge is the property of reason ('aql). Without reason there can be no true knowledge, and without true knowledge it is not possible to convert to Islam willingly and consciously. We are reminded of the saying of the Prophet: "no religion (din) to one who has no reason ('aql)".

Furthermore, we may argue that all religious obligations like prayer and fasting necessitates reason as the required condition of the obligation. Now if we take ‘to be a Muslim' as an obligation, then reason should also be an essential condition. As such, because a child's faculties of reason are still immature, it cannot be burdened with the responsibility.

Hence, what is the point of using the courts 'to convert' a child, and separate it from his or her non-Muslim mother? It should be clear by now that one does not become a Muslim by changing one's name to Muhammad or Abdullah, nor by changing the status of religion in the registration office, what more if it is done by someone else. Perhaps the converted parent is worried that his or her child may be raised in an 'unislamic' environment resulting in him or her being a non-Muslim adult. That fear is actually baseless, and it contradicts the parent's own experience.

A child is a child, and naturally has a strong emotional bond with its mother. As the child matures, it may make a conscious, willing decision concerning religion to adopt. To separate a child from its mother is indeed a cruel act, and is unjust from the point of view of Islam, let alone to claim that one is doing so in the name of Islam.

To leave the child in the care of its non-Muslim parent does not make the child an infidel. If Islam is defined as a willing and conscious act of submission, its antithesis, unbelief (kufr) points to a denial of consciousness, a refusal to submit, or to submit grudgingly. The cause of unbelief, as exemplified by the devil according to the Qur'an, is arrogance. One's refusal to open one's eyes, ears, and heart to the message of Islam without knowing what is being rejected is unbelief. The refusal to accept Islam after knowing its truth is an even greater form of unbelief because it assumes arrogance, and a refusal to submit to truth consciously. Are wenow saying that children who have yet to mature are arrogant and devilish?

Islam is not to be made the desperate handmaiden of any political party in dire need of support and membership at all costs. Islam is God's gift of mercy to mankind. Accepting and recognizing this gift does not make God greater for He is not in need of anything. Similarly by refusing it does not make Him a lesser God. Islam is not a religion for fools. Using the mechanism of the judiciary to 'Islamize' people, or to prevent them from leaving Islam is totally absurd. All it achieves is to unjustly potray all Muslims as ignorant fools, and as a result of association, Islam becomes the victim. Imagine what the non-Muslim community in general will understand of Islam. They will conclude that Islam is a cruel religion which seeks to separate a parent from his or her children. As a result, Islam will be put on trial. And this is already happening.

source
Reply

wilberhum
05-29-2007, 12:42 AM
From the llink:
Islam does acknowledge human rights but it is not without certain forms of control and limitation.
But there is a doctrine of inequality based on gender and religion.
I think when most people think of human rights they include legal equality.
Reply

syilla
05-29-2007, 12:59 AM
Originally Posted by wilberhum
From the llink:

But there is a doctrine of inequality based on gender and religion.
I think when most people think of human rights they include legal equality.
The question is...whether they have the correct definitions of equality. :?


quoted from the same article

In this spirit, the Islamic conception and practice of freedom differs from that of the modern secular idea of freedom. Hence, the so-called freedom to be homosexual, for example, can never be conceived as a real freedom by virtue of the fact that it is not a choice for the better. This can be extended to many other cases mentioned above where man tends to opt for the bad in disregard of many other good things available to him. Obviously, in the exercise of freedom, one needs to have knowledge of good and evil. The determination of good and evil cannot be understood by human reason alone because reason can be susceptible to error. Thus, absolute, supernatural or spiritual guidance is necessary. Here, religious and moral education constitutes significant prerequisites in understanding human rights. It is at this juncture that Islam offers divine intervention.

Rights and freedom can neither be separate nor detached from religion and morality. They are not territories without borders. They require certain regulations. They must be understood in light of proper knowledge acquired after experiencing a proper system of education, without any dualistic approach and without making a dichotomy between reason and morality at the expense of religion.
Reply

wilberhum
05-29-2007, 01:07 AM
Equality 1. state of being equal: rights, treatment, quantity, or value equal to all others in a specific group
full equality under the law

So you achieve your equality by creating separate groups based on religion and gender. Not the way the non-Muslim world looks at it.
Reply

syilla
05-29-2007, 01:11 AM
Originally Posted by wilberhum
by creating separate groups based on religion and gender. Not the way the non-Muslim world looks at it.
Are you sure that the non-muslim doesn't create any kind of seperate groups? :?
Reply

wilberhum
05-29-2007, 02:27 AM
Originally Posted by syilla
Are you sure that the non-muslim doesn't create any kind of seperate groups? :?
Well a perfect world or even a perfect government would be nice. But until Utopia is created,we just need to take what we got and make it better.

As long as there is human administration there will always be need for improvement.

At least in the US you cannot have laws that state that laws do or do not apply to you depending upon your gender or religion. But still we do have some legalized discrimination. Legal rights are given to a man and a woman that enter a legal contract, but two men or two women cannot obtain those legal rights. But at least we don’t kill them.
Reply

Keltoi
05-29-2007, 03:01 AM
I just find this debate disturbing in the context of freedom of religion. I suppose as an American the thought of someone no being allowed to choose their faith is an alien concept. I suppose if one lives in an Islamic state, or a country that borders on Islamic law, the situation becomes a little more complicated, as this right isn't promised them. However, I do think suggesting this person should leave her country is hypocritical, as I have seen the outrage(and rightly so) that Muslims feel when some suggest they should leave the West.
Reply

syilla
05-29-2007, 03:03 AM
Originally Posted by Keltoi
I just find this debate disturbing in the context of freedom of religion. I suppose as an American the thought of someone no being allowed to choose their faith is an alien concept. I suppose if one lives in an Islamic state, or a country that borders on Islamic law, the situation becomes a little more complicated, as this right isn't promised them. However, I do think suggesting this person should leave her country is hypocritical, as I have seen the outrage(and rightly so) that Muslims feel when some suggest they should leave the West.
Actually it is more a rumour regarding 'ask to leave the country".

The case are still open.
Reply

syilla
05-29-2007, 03:07 AM
Whither Jurisdictional Conflict

Dr. Wan Azhar bin Wan Ahmad
Fellow Kanan

15/05/2007 | The Star

Last Tuesday (08.05.07), I attended a roundtable discussion regarding the ongoing jurisdictional conflict between the Malaysian civil and Syariah courts at the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM). Many issues and concerns were raised, and suggestions to address the situation were made accordingly. Some recommendations seemed plausible but when it came to practical amicable resolutions, none were clear or certain. Many factors must be considered as these factors are interrelated and are not without certain implications.
The saga seems to continue, as can be discerned from a series of unfolding events, resulting in a ‘tug of war' between the two applied Malaysian legal systems. It has created unwarranted tension, suspicion and dissatisfaction among the multi-racial population of our country.

This ugly face of confrontation culminated in a string of cases which have affected the nation. These cases include Shamala, Lina Joy, Nyonya Tahir, M. Moorthy, Rayappan Anthony, Subashini, and perhaps the latest, P. Marimuthu. It appears that certain quarters are manipulating these cases in hopes of portraying Islamic law and its entire system as cruel, unreasonable, out-of-date and on a collision course with civil laws and/or the doctrine of human rights.

Despite the ‘sensitivity' involved in all these cases, we still need to tackle the various related issues raised with great wisdom. Discussion of this sort requires a high degree of open mindedness between all affected parties. Concerns of numerous parties in cases of this nature are real, and NOBODY should underestimate its social, economic, political and religious consequences.

None, particularly the authorities, should be dismissive, simply sweeping things under the rug pretending as if a conflict and its ensuing repercussions do not exist or that nothing is wrong with our legal system. We do not want this whole issue to develop into a kind of ticking time bomb armed to blow apart our national solidarity so carefully nurtured by our forefathers and tirelessly emulated by the Government for decades.

People normally think and behave within the framework of certain legal precedents, be they divine or mundane. In the Malaysian context, this attitude has been shaped primarily by our Federal Constitution, the supreme law of the land. With regard to the problematic relationship between Syariah vis-à-vis civil laws, one may argue that perhaps the root cause is attributable to our esteemed Constitution.

The Ninth Schedule of the Constitution prescribes the legislative division of the federal and state governments. While the Federal List (List I) enumerates areas that come under the legislative powers of the Central Government, the State List (List II) put Malay customs, Islamic law and its administration under the responsibility of the State assemblies. It clearly states that the State legislatures are to preserve Islamic law as well as the constitution, organization and procedure of the Syariah courts which, in both situations, shall have jurisdiction only over persons professing the religion of Islam.

The State legislatures have accordingly consolidated these provisions in the various State Enactments/Acts. For example, section 46(2)(b) of the Administration of Islamic Law (Federal Territories) Act 1993, states that "A Syariah High court shall in its civil jurisdiction, hear and determine all actions and proceedings in which all the parties are Muslims...".

The same constitutional restrictive spirit is embedded in certain other civil statutory laws, such as in the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act, 1976. Section 3 clearly mentions that the Act shall not apply to a Muslim while section 51(1) states that if one party to a marriage has converted to Islam, the other party who has not so converted may petition for divorce. Meaning, the converting party is not given any opportunity to apply for dissolution of marriage under civil law.

Why all these limitations? It is these limitations that have partially-if not significantly-contributed to the worsening jurisdictional conflict and has triggered misunderstanding and friction in the pluralistic Malaysian society.

I believe that the learned framers of the Constitution, as well as the draftsmen at both national and state levels, were mistaken in putting such a limitation. It is unfortunate if the inclusion sprung out from their limited knowledge of Islam, thinking that Islamic courts are exclusively for Muslims. One may submit that these framers and draftsmen were unwitting factors responsible for opening ‘Pandora's box' which has subsequently created the confusion blanketing the nation today!

This fact is possibly what many are not aware of. From the early days of Islam, history shows that non-Muslims sought remedies to settle their disputes with Muslims in Islamic courts. One striking classic example is the dispute between the fourth rightly guided Caliph, Ali, then the head executive of the Islamic state, and a Jew. Both went to the court over ownership of a saddle. Based on the evidence presented before the court, the judgment meted out by the presiding Muslim judge was in favour of the Jew. One may conclude that even though the case involved the sovereign and a layman, both from two different religious backgrounds, there was no element of bias or suppression of justice.

Looking at another constitutional provision, Article 121(1A) somehow reinforces the State List in the Ninth Schedule. It further strengthens the position of the Syariah courts in stating that the civil courts shall have no jurisdiction on matters that fall under the jurisdiction of the former.

In determining this constitutional jurisdiction, the civil courts take two different approaches: ‘express jurisdiction' and ‘implied jurisdiction'. The first suggests that in order for the Syariah court to have jurisdiction, State assemblies need to expressly confer such jurisdiction by officially having legal provisions in appropriate enactments. This, for example, can be seen in the decided cases of Ng Wan Chan and Lim Chan Seng.

On the contrary, the second approach suggests that the Syariah courts may have jurisdiction directly but this is implied from the State List without any express conferment from the State legislatures. The absence of explicit jurisdiction is not to hinder the Syariah courts from assuming jurisdiction on matters listed in the State List though the relevant specific provisions are yet to be enacted. This has been decided in cases like Md Hakim Lee, Tan Sung Mooi and Soon Singh in particular.

The above two approaches basically points to the discernment of judges in interpreting legal provisions. It requires tremendous wisdom and well considered judicious opinion from all courts judges. With regard to the syarie judges, it is here that the element of dynamic ijtihad is applicable. The lack of this quality is perhaps another factor that may be associated with the jurisdictional conflict between the two judicial systems. This reiterates the call by some parties for our judges to be more courageous in their judgments, without fear or favour, even if they need to depart from the established norms.

Many would share my belief that in meting out judgments, apart from all those available legal provisions, we need to use logic and rational thinking to decide disputes. Often times, justice is realized not by looking into the words and letters of the law, but rather by looking into the spirit, purpose or objective of the law itself. Among the keywords requiring invocation at all the times here is ‘in the interest of justice'.

The general masses must not be spared from taking some responsibilities. I have reason to believe that the current jurisdictional conflict, reflecting prejudices about the Islamic judicial system, are caused primarily by misrepresentations. More tend to hold that indeed Islam is the most misunderstood world religion. A lot of misrepresentations are spreading through various channels and forms, deceiving many to believe that Islam is synonymous with terrorism, barbarism, injustice, etc-you name it-generating ‘Islamophia' and fears of the unknown.

As educated citizens, Muslims and non-Muslims must not be easily influenced by ‘stories' put forth to them without questioning the source. We must do a reasonable amount of research to examine whether or not things are being explained correctly. Do not make premature judgments. Do not become opportunists in the sense that if something is beneficial for you, you keep your mouth shut. But when something seems to impinge on your interest, and that without proper information on your part, you run out of saliva expressing your unhappiness all over the world.

Apparently, to put an end to the jurisdictional conflict and to bring about meaningful peace and harmony, we are in dire need of a strong political will and support from the government. Efforts by academicians, government agencies or NGOs are going nowhere without the sincere commitment from the Executors and Legislators, the law makers. A number of observations have been made by various concerned parties with regard to the Federal Constitution, Acts passed by Parliament and other States enactments. Our Parliament, as well as State legislatures, with the assistance of the Attorney-General's Chambers, are urged to pay heed and take action to bring about necessary changes not only to maintain unity and stability in this country, but to advance it to new heights.
Reply

rav
05-29-2007, 03:20 AM
Islam has never compelled anyone to accept the religion. Anyone who becomes a Muslim does so purely through objective study of the religion.
Shalom (Peace),

I'm curious about the children of Muslim parents who are raised to become Muslims. They never really had a "choice". Are they allowed at a cerain age to leave the religion, or are they stuck with it from birth as well, because your post which said "never compelled anyone to accept the religion" makes it seem like all Muslims by birth have a choice in which they can leave if they want at some period in their lives.

Could you clear this up? Thanks in advance.
Reply

Cognescenti
05-29-2007, 03:28 AM
And if her "decision" to embrace Islam was made by her parents, as is most certainly the case, before the age of consent, before she could understand the consequences of her "decision", what then? Is there an "opt out clause" when you are 15?

It is true there is similar language in the Bible, and it was used, to the great detriment of the Church, during the Inquisition..to stamp out "heretics" (Protestants).

It is now a source of considerable embarrassment.
Reply

wilberhum
05-29-2007, 03:36 AM
1. Islam has never compelled anyone to accept the religion. Anyone who becomes a Muslim does so purely through objective study of the religion. As Allah has informed us in the Qur'an:
I would find it quite compelling if I was told that I was going to be decapitated if I didn't accept Islam. But that maybe it is only me that thinks that would be compelling. :skeleton:
Reply

Philosopher
05-29-2007, 03:40 AM
It's sad that a person has to suffer because of poorly written fairy tales. I wish Jesus and Mohammed never existed (well Jesus never existed so lol).
Reply

wilberhum
05-29-2007, 03:48 AM
There is more than a little evidence that Jesus existed.

The question is: was he god, a prophet, or just a Jew that was angry with the system.
Reply

Philosopher
05-29-2007, 04:54 AM
Originally Posted by wilberhum
There is more than a little evidence that Jesus existed.

The question is: was he god, a prophet, or just a Jew that was angry with the system.
At best, he was a radical like Bin Laden is to Islam. Nothing more. He was an illegitimate child of 12 year old Mary, who was either raped or engaged in premarital sex. The Trinity is nothing more that modified pagan beliefs.

That is the closes to reality. Personally, I am compelled to believe this Jesus fellow never existed. Read up on books by Earl Doherty.
http://amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw/104...0&Go.y=0&Go=Go
Reply

wilberhum
05-29-2007, 05:30 AM
like Bin Laden
Now that is hardly fare. Personally I think Jesus was nothing more than a ruble Jew. But he taught peace and love. Hardly a mass murder and hate peddler.
Reply

Zulkiflim
05-29-2007, 05:48 AM
Salaam,

I am a malay and Lina joy is a malay.

I am from a negbouring coutnry Singapore.

I cnat say for Malaysian but here in SG if this were to happen,the goverment cant stop it.

BUT the Malay muslim community will speak with ONE VOICE..OSTRACIZE and CONDEMNATION.

She will be removed from our parties,our gathering and celebrations.

Worse if she even forces herself to any of our family gathering ,we will use force to evict her.

Until she recant,she will a woman born of no muslim.
Reply

wilberhum
05-29-2007, 05:54 AM
Originally Posted by Zulkiflim
Salaam,

I am a malay and Lina joy is a malay.

I am from a negbouring coutnry Singapore.

I cnat say for Malaysian but here in SG if this were to happen,the goverment cant stop it.

BUT the Malay muslim community will speak with ONE VOICE..OSTRACIZE and CONDEMNATION.

She will be removed from our parties,our gathering and celebrations.

Worse if she even forces herself to any of our family gathering ,we will use force to evict her.

Until she recant,she will a woman born of no muslim.
So much hate. So sad. Does god want us to hate that much?

There is no compulsion to religion. :skeleton: Right!
Like being ostracized and condemned by your community is no compulsion. :?
Reply

syilla
05-29-2007, 06:56 AM
Originally Posted by wilberhum
I would find it quite compelling if I was told that I was going to be decapitated if I didn't accept Islam. But that maybe it is only me that thinks that would be compelling. :skeleton:
try reading more about shariah law...then only you would understand.

you won't be decapitated if you don't accept islam. Do you think there are non-muslims in arab?
Reply

Trumble
05-29-2007, 07:41 AM
Originally Posted by Zulkiflim
BUT the Malay muslim community will speak with ONE VOICE..OSTRACIZE and CONDEMNATION.

She will be removed from our parties,our gathering and celebrations.

Worse if she even forces herself to any of our family gathering ,we will use force to evict her.

Until she recant,she will a woman born of no muslim.

"One voice" of hatred and intolerance. Lovely. That will at least make it easier for her... being excluded from such a "community" is no loss.
Reply

Zulkiflim
05-29-2007, 07:49 AM
Originally Posted by wilberhum
So much hate. So sad. Does god want us to hate that much?

There is no compulsion to religion. :skeleton: Right!
Like being ostracized and condemned by your community is no compulsion. :?

Salaam,

It is not compulsion,,she went her way and we go ours.

Let her path notintersect with ours..

She cannot use her family assets.
She cannot use the family names
She will be removed from all financial support.

As she has abandoned us,so we will abandon her.

A cancer must be cut away.

It is not hatred,it is seclusion.
As she make her choice so do we.
Reply

Zulkiflim
05-29-2007, 07:50 AM
Originally Posted by Trumble
"One voice" of hatred and intolerance. Lovely. That will at least make it easier for her... being excluded from such a "community" is no loss.
Salaam,

then well and good,for as she abandoned her family and community,she should find her own "enlightening" community.

Let her go her way and we go ours.

She will be a pariah,none will see her.
As she has laready chosen to NOT SEE US
Reply

Cognescenti
05-29-2007, 03:13 PM
Originally Posted by Zulkiflim
Salaam,

It is not compulsion,,she went her way and we go ours.

Let her path notintersect with ours..

She cannot use her family assets.
She cannot use the family names
She will be removed from all financial support.

As she has abandoned us,so we will abandon her.

A cancer must be cut away.

It is not hatred,it is seclusion.
As she make her choice so do we.
Not hatred? Wow. You use words like "cancer". So, what you are saying is your neighborhood would not be a good place for a couple of Mormon kids to be riding around on their bicycles in white shirts introducing people to the Book of Mormon?
Reply

- Qatada -
05-29-2007, 03:17 PM
I think the discussions just about the exact same things mentioned right at the beginning of the thread. So it's pointless.


Thread Closed.
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: 17
    Last Post: 06-03-2008, 07:22 AM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!