Islam and Apostasy

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Just a minor point, "Islam doesn't deprive anyone of freedoms.", ALL "order" restricts someone's freedoms.

Even Wilber Hum's choice of "order"

Excellent point, nimrod.

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

:salamext:
Brother Ansar

http://www.islamicboard.com/refutations/4738-islam-apostasy-post232188.html
this is beneficial :thankyou:
specially

Alhamdulilah.

Do u mean knowledgeable Muslim will never left Islam.

Than I have 1 question
Does it ur personal view
Or
the Qur’an or Authentic Hadis support it

This observation has been noted by many Muslim scholars and it relates to the Qur'an's description of the faith of the believer as 'firmly rooted'.

But I m afraid
I m not believe that knowledgeable Muslim will never left Islam

* If any knowledgeable Muslim have weak heart and His mind is not strong
* He lives in, where almost every one against him or confused him
* live in such culture (like so called modern or ultra modern culture of the world is so delicious.) where Weak hearted Muslim (can be knowledgeable) could be blinded totally. {many more.......}
(I wonder what else one can not do on that culture. Every naked thing is supported and inspired. People enjoy and encouraged in bad thing while good and noble thing discouraged or banned i.e.; “wearing hijab is discouraged or banned. Really hard to believe”)​

​

I mean a knowledgeable, practicing devout Muslim. In Islam, knowledge and the application of knowledge go hand-in-hand.

 

[wilberhum]

I have been accused of not reading and not understanding. I assure that neither is correct. I am not finished going through everything yet, it is not a small job. I will continue working on it. I will spend so much time on this because it is a subject that hits close to home. I’m a Catholic apostate. It was not a decision that I took lightly. I did a lot of soul searching, thinking, and studying before the decision was made. As someone who has gone through the process, I am mortified that anyone would conceder killing me or anyone, because of that decision. I, as you, was told my religion was right and all others were wrong. Living in the real world there is nothing unique about this. All religions say the same thing. That is only logical. Why would anyone believe in a religion that says they are wrong? Religion has always used Fear as a way to keep people in line. Fear of the hear-after keeps many in line but currently the only religion that uses physical fear is Islam. Christians called it heresy and burned you at the stake for it, but Christianity got over it. It is now for Islam to leave the 14 centaury. I am not one of them, but there are many that hate Islam. Killing people for exercising freedom of speech, religion, and thought is not a small part of what makes them fear and hate Islam. I want to see an end to that hate and fear and I also want to defend freedoms.
I have copied statements from prior posts (Red) and commented on them.
I will continue on reading, researching, and commenting, but this is all that I can do today.

The original question was: How are they dealt with? According to Islam? What does the Quran say about their punishment?
Additional Statements and comments:
Islam, from the onset, has never compelled anyone to accept it as his or her religion.Of course there are many occurrences where there was not war and people freely and openly converted. But when there was war, and there was a lot of it, it was converting, die, or pay extensive taxes. Many chose conversion, not out of faith, but because of the conquinces. How else do you logically come to instant conversion after just being conquered?
Islam grants the individual an opportunity to repent.If a person has truly followed there conscious, there is nothing to repent.
So that his misconceptions can be removed
You assume that if there is no misconception no one would leave Islam. Obviously a misconception on your part.
Issues that give him doubt can be clarified by rational proofs and tangible evidence.I just love “Rational Proofs”! There is no such thing. Any one not wearing “Faith Blinders” knows that when it comes to religion, there is no proof. No one can even prove god exists so anything dealing with god is impossible to prove.
The punishment prescribed for it in the Sunnah is executionThere are some that deny this but most acknowledge this and no small number want it enforced.
It came as a remedy for a problem
Any solution to any problem will create another problem. The solution for the problems that apostasy creates is to deny people freedom of religion, speech, and thought. Now maybe you like that solution, but I conceder it evil.
In order to cause doubt and uncertainty in the hearts of the believers.So they made people think? Right? If there faith is weak, it should be tested. That is how you honestly make up your mind. Not a capital offence in my book or most of the world.
(To be continued)

 

[extinction]

I just want to say what are the laws and punishments for treason? a person who once accepting islam and then leaves is basically doing treason........
trea·son (trzn) KEY

NOUN:

Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
A betrayal of trust or confidence.

 

[extinction]

i will add to my last post..when he says the kalima he has know taken a trust..by leaving that he has betrayed that trust when accepting Islam he is immediately bounded by Islamic laws...kind of like when a person says I do in a marriage he has only said two words (qabil tuha) in arabic..he is bound by the laws of marriage he may not sleep with other women..he has a right to look after his wife...am I making sense??

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello Wilber,
Thank you for your post.

I have been accused of not reading and not understanding. I assure that neither is correct.

Yet it is very easy for someone to think otherwise when you simply restate the misconceptions that were previously debunked, without commenting on the explanation. Looking at your post, you've begun to respond to points in this thread, which is good, but you've missed the most important post which I continually refer you to:
http://www.islamicboard.com/232188-post29.html
Please respond to that post. In that post I have included all relevant information from previous posts so if you read that one you will be up to speed with the issue.

As someone who has gone through the process, I am mortified that anyone would conceder killing me or anyone, because of that decision.

No one would kill you for your personal decision. The Islamic state is not interested in the personal affairs of people. The Islamic state is interested in the protection of society and the establishment of law and order within society. It is only when an individuals actions pose a threat to the general society that a state will take action.

I, as you, was told my religion was right and all others were wrong.

Islam does not simply say 'we are right, all others are wrong'. The Qur'an does not simply say 'we are right, all others are wrong'. Neither did the Prophet pbuh. Instead Islam calls all human beings to use their intellect which God has blessed them with and reflect on the universe so that they may realize that the only true path in this life is submission to the One True God who created everything. That is exactly what Islam is. It is incorrect to suggest that Islam is one religion of many since the meaning of Islam is submission to God and this is the only path for those who acknowledge the existence of God.

Religion has always used Fear as a way to keep people in line.

Non-muslims often misquote the Islamic concept of fear as you've done above. In Islam we worship God with the utmost devotion which reflects three aspects - Hope in His Mercy, Fear of displeasing Him, and Love of God. Anyone who focuses on only one aspect will be deficient in their worship.

Fear of the hear-after keeps many in line but currently the only religion that uses physical fear is Islam.

False. Islam is against coercion and compulsion. The Islamic state is only interested in the protection of society, as you would know if you went through the post I linked. If by physical fear you are referring to state punishments then the blame rests on every single civilized society in the modern world. Every single civilized society in the modern world keeps its citizens in line by using fear. Fear of the legal consequences that may follow from one's actions is a major factor in preventing crime (although it is not the sole factor). So your notion that physical fear is something characteric of primitive religious traditions is evidently false in light of the necessity of law enforcement in modern society.

It is now for Islam to leave the 14 centaury.

Islam never was and never will be bound to one time era. The use of punishments for the protection of society is something that we find in all modern societies.

Killing people for exercising freedom of speech, religion, and thought is not a small part of what makes them fear and hate Islam.

Never does Islam punish, let alone kill anyone for simply excercising freedom of speech, religion or thought. This is your misconception. Islam, like every modern society, balances individual freedoms with the rights and safety of the society. If you are inciting hatred in a western society you will be punished because there are limits on your freedom of speech. If you implement a religious practice that violates the law, such as those relating to the use of drugs, you will be punished because there are limits on your freedom of religion. Every society places reasonable limits on the freedoms of the individual in accordance with the protection of society.

Additional Statements and comments:
Islam, from the onset, has never compelled anyone to accept it as his or her religion.Of course there are many occurrences where there was not war and people freely and openly converted. But when there was war, and there was a lot of it, it was converting, die, or pay extensive taxes.

Evidently you need to study Islamic history more closely, as well as Islamic law since you have misconceptions concerning Jizya:
http://www.load-islam.com/C/rebuttals/Misquoted/#13

Let me correct this misconception of 'extensive taxes' briefly by pointing out that Abu'l-Hasan Al-Mawardi (d. 1058CE), a leading Muslim judge, states that the amount of taxes should be something negotiated and fixed to the satisfaction of the leaders of those being taxed (Al-Mawardi, al-Ahkam as-Sultaniyyah, Ta-Ha Publishers Ltd. 1996, pp. 209-210).

Many chose conversion, not out of faith, but because of the conquinces.

I tried to think of a possible meaning for 'conquinces', but at any rate the Islamic government has never pressurized the non-muslims to accept the faith.

How else do you logically come to instant conversion after just being conquered?

Which instant conversion are you referring to?

Islam grants the individual an opportunity to repent. If a person has truly followed there conscious, there is nothing to repent.
So that his misconceptions can be removed
You assume that if there is no misconception no one would leave Islam. Obviously a misconception on your part.

If you had followed my discussion with Sharvy you would know that there has never been a case in the history of Islam where an educated Muslim, without any misconceptions, has abandoned Islam because they feel the religion is inadequate or flawed. As demonstrated by historical fact, apostasy has only ever occured due to social or political circumstances; never has anyone with a good understanding of the religion abadoned it because they feel it is flawed.

Issues that give him doubt can be clarified by rational proofs and tangible evidence.I just love “Rational Proofs”! There is no such thing.

Your personal opinion. There are of course many rational proofs (as I have shown constantly dialoguing with non-muslims on the forum) which explain Islamic teachings and refute allegations against Islam. In addition to that, there are rational proofs for the validity of the religion itself. If you haven't seen them, that is your problem, not mine.

Any one not wearing “Faith Blinders” knows that when it comes to religion, there is no proof. No one can even prove god exists so anything dealing with god is impossible to prove.

I have had several long discussions on the existence of God with atheists on the forum which you can read in the comparative religion section. For the purpose of this thread I will briefly state that one can certainly come to the recognition of the divine through the use of their intellect.

The punishment prescribed for it in the Sunnah is executionThere are some that deny this but most acknowledge this and no small number want it enforced.

Read my post for the explanation:
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparative-religion/6568-existence-god.html

It came as a remedy for a problem
Any solution to any problem will create another problem. The solution for the problems that apostasy creates is to deny people freedom of religion, speech, and thought.

False. Islam does not deny these freedoms, but like all mdoern societies individual freedoms are subject to reasonable limitations and balanced with the rights of the society.

In order to cause doubt and uncertainty in the hearts of the believers.So they made people think? Right? If there faith is weak, it should be tested. That is how you honestly make up your mind. Not a capital offence in my book or most of the world.

Not making people think they were playing a poor game of deception, trying to pretend that the religion was flawed by apostatizing instead of using logical argumentation which had failed for them. it is logical argumentation which leads to the truth and causes people to think not poor games of deception.

Please go over this post and respond to my comments listed therein:
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparative-religion/6568-existence-god.html

Peace

 

[wilberhum]

Continueing as promised:
From; http://islamtoday.net/english/discover_islam.cfm?cat_id=6&sub_cat_id=48Works on the premise of “Security and stability are basic human needs” and puts no value on freedom of speech, religion, or thought. By contrast I think freedoms are basic human needs. I guess if you love not your freedoms that you could like this approach. For me, I conceder freedoms to be of high value and disagree the concept that you can’t have both.
From: http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/...h-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503544134
If a sane person who has reached puberty voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be punished.‏ …., but if he refuses, he is immediately killed.‏Christians use to kill heretics. That doesn’t make it right. Hitler killed people that spoke out against him. I would like to think Islam is better than that. Just because someone made it a law does not make it a Just Law. I think it is the ultimate in arrogance to feel you have the right to deal out “God’s Justice”. I think god is quite capable of handling his own affairs’.
No one besides the caliph or his representative may kill the apostate. or his representative may kill the apostate.It seams to me since there are no longer a caliph, that the law in null and void.
http://muslim-canada.org/APOSNOFR.HTM#fourAddresses the issue as if Islam is the state government. As such, all they state is irrelevant unless it is an Islamic State under Sharia Law. Now the other day I said that the Islamic view of Apostasy was the “second most offensive concept within any religion”. Now we have reached the first, an Islamic State. In my opinion a Theocracy is second in evil only to Communism. How can you conceder setting up a government based on inequality and legalized discrimination anything but evil? This is not just a problem in an Islamic Theocracy; it is a problem with all Theocracies. There were unspeakable horrors that occurred in Europe when Christian Theocracies thrived. The same happened in Islam and current Islamic governments continue. I posted the other day some thing I titled “When we were tribes”. A lot of that applies here. If you want to create a government that legally makes you superior at the cost of those you conceder, just like Hitler did, the world will stand against you. But your dear Utopia that would make 80% of the world “Inferior” is just an evil dream and a whole other topic.
http://www.ymofmd.com/books/zb_mri/islam_and_human_rights.htm
The punishment due on apostasy as established by Hadith is not inconsistent with the religious liberty assured by IslamThen the only religious liberty within Islam for a Muslim is none. If Muslims lack freedom of religion then everyone’s religious freedom is at stake.
The punishment of the apostate is because of his treasonable and deceptive conduct.How is someone deciding Allah is not god treasonable? What is deceptive about saying Allah is not god? If I can not believe in god as my conscious says, I have not freedom of religion. If I can not tell you what I believe, I have not freedom of speech.
Punishment stipulated for these apostates is meant to protect the religious liberty from being abused or misused. It will no longer be liberty but anarchy.Anarchy? Because someone chooses another religion? Protect religious liberty by denying it? Now I understand why democracy is so evil. It allows everyone to practice the religion of there choice. Believe me, I prefer the Anarchy.
Non-Muslims should not be pressurized to embrace Islam, has left them free to practice the tenets of their own religion and did not require them to practice the Islamic tenets or interfere with their practices or their religious places.That is a nice thought but is not the reality in Islamic countries.
From another post: punishing apostates just for leaving Islam conflicts with the Quran.Tell that to the poor Afghani that had to be smuggled to Italy so he would not be killed.
We can't use the story of Musylama Al-Kath-thab to prove that it is ok today to kill any person who deserts Islam.Ya for our side. It is always good to know that you are not a lone voice in the dark. I wish more felt the way you do, but I fear that we are a small minority. Or is this just an example of where it can not be used and you there are examples of where it can be used today?
Another Post: The authentic view is that the apostate has committed treason against the Islamic state (bear in mind that all Muslim citizens pledge allegiance to the head of state, therefore this is treason) and is punishable by capital punishment Well like I said, the voice of tolerance is a minority voice. It is treason because allegiance is pledged to the head of state. Kind of sounds like what the Nazis did. Stand behind the government, right or wrong. I guess we should kill everyone that wants to impeach Bush. Not only do you want to do away with freedom of religion, you want to do away with ALL freedoms. Live for the state, you would make a good communist.
Generally this ruling of allowing killing of apostates was initiated coz Jews pretended to be Muslims and caused confusion among Muslims.Boy, Muslims must be easily confused. To kill someone because they confused you. Talk about intolerance, this takes the cake.
"It is our opinion that whoever claims the acceptability of any existing religion today-other than Islam-such as Judaism, Christianity and so forth is a non believer. He should be asked to repent. If he does not, he must be killed as an apostate because he is rejecting the Quran (Sheikh Muhammad as Saleh al Uthaimin.Now that is a new one to me. The final, total, and ultimate statement of intolerance. That the problem with allowing some intolerance. Soon you will have total intolerance. It sure would cure the problem of overpopulation though.
Prophets ordered that their hands and legs should be cut off and that their eyes should be branded with heated pieces of iron, and that their cut hands and legs should not be cauterized, till they die.Now this is something to be proud of. Torture them to death. But that’s another subject.
The death penalty for rebellion against God.Your god not mine. So you think you got the right god. So do I. If turn about if fair play, I should be able to kill you. But then I believe in freedom and tolerance. Too bad you have bought the “I’m Superior” attitude and think you are so god like that you are qualified to enact his punishment.
No knowledgeable Muslim has ever left Islam.Right! Who would want to be killed? Or many be the intolerance preached is what made them leave. Of course all of this is based on the “I’m Right and You’re Wrong, and if you don’t believe me just ask me” attitude.
The only cases we find of former Muslims are people who were never practicing Muslims in the first placeI bet there are thousands. What an absurd statement. Lift the “Faith Blinders” and you will see that it has to be a totally absurd statement.
an Islamic state is certainly justified in punishing those who betray the state, committing treason and support enemy forcesIt is so far fetched to say that some one who claims Allah is not god is betraying the state, committing treason and supporting enemy forces. What a garbage statement.
(To be continued, I will answer question when I am finished)

 

[cool_jannah]

willberhum
have you lost your sense of reasoning?

According to your Bible...for a person who speaks blasphemy against God is supposed to be CERTAINLY PUT TO DEATH.
For the non-muslims, religion is a joke. Their desires is their Lord and thats what they worship and obey and bow down to.

If you had any sense of certainty that your religion is the truth, you would have applied that punishment to the disbelievers since it is a command from your Lord.

and what is humane? the filth that you guys are into? dis-believing in the Oneness of God is the worst crime a person can commit.

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Continueing as promised:

Did you completely miss my last resposne to you???
http://www.islamicboard.com/267316-post101.html

You haven't responded to any of my points to you, nor my request to read the following response of mine:
http://www.islamicboard.com/232188-post29.html

You continue to repeat the same issues that I've already answered. I'll answer the new points in this post, but for my responses to the others refer to the previous post from me.

Works on the premise of “Security and stability are basic human needs” and puts no value on freedom of speech, religion, or thought.

Wrong. Individual freedoms are balanced with the security of the society in EVERY modern society.

In my opinion a Theocracy is second in evil only to Communism.

The Islamic government is not a theocracy, which is purely western term.
Read about the Islamic concept of government here:
http://www.islamicboard.com/world-affairs/1994-islamic-state-conceptual-analysis.html

That is a nice thought but is not the reality in Islamic countries.

We are talking about the laws of the Islamic state, not the malpractice of Islam in some countries with Muslim majority.

Well like I said, the voice of tolerance is a minority voice.

Everything is a silent voice if you won't bother to listen to what I am trying to tell you! When are you going to start responding to my posts??

Now this is something to be proud of. Torture them to death. But that’s another subject.

This is a seperate issue altogether and it is dealt with here:
http://www.load-islam.com/C/rebuttals/Misquoted/#18

No knowledgeable Muslim has ever left Islam.Right! Who would want to be killed?

Finally you've gotten to my post, but you're still ignoring what I've already said:

There simply have never been educated and devout Muslims who have later rejected the religion, though they have had the opportunity and often pressure to do so, especially in Non-Muslim countries. As Dr. Laurence Brown MD writes

The question pops into the average Western mind, “Why do some scholars of Christianity and Judaism embrace orthodox (Sunni) Islam?” There is no pressure upon them to do so, and a world of fleshy reasons not to -- things like losing their congregation, position, status, friends, family, job, retirement pension, etc. And why don’t Islamic scholars turn to something else? Other religions are much more permissive of worldly desires, and there is no enforcement of a law against apostatizing from Islam in Western lands.

So why have many Jewish and Christian scholars embraced Islam, while educated Muslims remain firm in their faith? Muslims suggest that the answer returns once again to the definition of Islam. The person who submits to God and not to a particular ecclesiastical belief will recognize a divine sense to revelation. The Muslim presents a continuum between Judaism, Christianity and Islam which, once recognized, sweeps the
sincere seeker down the smooth flow of revelation. The claim is that once a person sees past Western prejudices and propaganda, doors of understanding open. (Brown, The First and Final Commandment, p.33)​

Dr. Brown was an atheist who converted to Christianity and finally to Islam.

...First, as Dr. Brown mentioned, there is no law against apostasy in the western countries. Second, the Muslim community doesn't care about someone who is not harming them or propagating a negative image of Islam. Christian priests who convert to Islam only praise Islam in their speeches but they usually don't go around throwing mud at Christianity. If an educated and devout Muslim became a Christian or Atheist, especially in a western country, and didn't bother himself with attacking Islam, he would not be bothered by the Muslim community. But if he publicly began attacking Islam and propagating a negative image of Islam in the media, that is when he might expect a negative reaction. So this really isn't an excuse because a knowledgeable Muslim could easily have the opportunity to leave Islam without any negative consequences, yet such an occurance has never happened.

The only cases we find of former Muslims are people who were never practicing Muslims in the first placeI bet there are thousands. What an absurd statement. Lift the “Faith Blinders” and you will see that it has to be a totally absurd statement.

Don't just tell me my statement is absurd, provide evidence. Try to refute what I've said. There has never been a case of an educated practicing Muslim leaving Islam.

an Islamic state is certainly justified in punishing those who betray the state, committing treason and support enemy forcesIt is so far fetched to say that some one who claims Allah is not god is betraying the state, committing treason and supporting enemy forces. What a garbage statement.

Did I ever say that?! Don't put words in my mouth and then call it garbage! I said the punishment is for those who betray the state. I NEVER said that someone who changes their personal belief is committing treason!! Not only do you ignore my explanations, but whenever you do reply, you misquote my statements to further your own close-minded bigoted and intolerant view of Islam. If you don't change this attitude, then dialoguing with you is utterly hopeless.

Wilber, I'd really like to give you one more opportunity to discuss this issue, but you need to start responding to my explanations and stop misquoting me. Please respond to this post:
http://www.islamicboard.com/20595-post1.html

Regards

 

[wilberhum]

Ansar Al-‘Adi
I truly planed on going through all the posts. But alas, there is too little time and too many posts. Besides the only one that really responded was you. So here it is and this one is for you.
No one would kill you for your personal decision. True, kind of. But if anyone’s religious freedom is threatened, then everyone’s freedom is threatened. I believe everyone should share the same freedoms. Do you believe that not every one should have the same basic freedoms? Should freedoms differ from one country to another? Shouldn’t basic freedoms be universal? Is freedom of religion not a basic freedom?Islam does not simply say 'we are right, all others are wrong'.You dance around the statement but in fact Islam clams “There is no God but Allah”. So you claim that you are right and everyone else is wrong. But again, I have no problem with that; it is the basis of each and every religion.
In your response to “Religion has always used Fear as a way to keep people in line.” You state “Fear of displeasing Him”. That is exactly my point. I never said that fear was the only instrument used to keep people in line.
To “Fear of the hear-after keeps many in line but currently the only religion that uses physical fear is Islam.” You responded “False” but that is exactly what killing apostates is. This is only one example; there are thousands of other examples. Of course there is always the clam that they do not represent Islam. They may not but they do impact your image in the mind of the non-Muslims and the lack of condemnation of them also has a major impact. When you add justification for killing people for exercising there freedoms, it only gets worse. But maybe you don’t care. So I ask the question, do you care what the image of Islam is to the non-Islamic world?From http://www.load-islam.com/C/rebuttals/Misquoted/#13
The Islamic State is not permitted to attack non-Muslims who are not hostile but they did. Now of course you can always say that all 80+ attacks were all self defense. You may even believe that. But the history that I read tells a totally different story. It is a little illogical to assume that every non-Muslim tribe was hostile. Unless you just say they were hostel to being invaded.
The amount of taxes should be something negotiated and fixed to the satisfaction of the leaders of those being taxed. You make it sound like an equal negotiation. A surrendering partner is not an equal partner. They would agree to do what ever they had to do to stay alive. I, as most, would prefer massage taxation to death. Not a tough choice.
I tried to think of a possible meaning for 'conquinces', but at any rate the Islamic government has never pressurized the non-Muslims to accept the faith. There were many consequences for being a non believer. Massive taxation is only one, and it is truly one.
Which instant conversion are you referring to? I’m referring to everyone who instantly after surrendering chose Islam over death or taxes.
You would know that there has never been a case in the history of Islam where an educated Muslim, without any misconceptions, has abandoned Islam because they feel the religion is inadequate or flawed. Dream on. No open minded intelligent person could ever make such a statement.
There are of course many rational proofs. You seriously need to consult a dictionary. You can make a rational choice, but it proves nothing.
One can certainly come to the recognition of the divine through the use of their intellect. This one you got right, kind of. You can use your intellect to come to a conclusion that god exists. I did. But that is not proof that god exists. You even say “I don't believe someone can 'prove' the existence of God “. So what is your point?
Islam does not deny these freedoms. Come on man. Some one exercises freedom or religion, speech and thought, they he is killed, depriving him the greatest freedom of all, the freedom to live.
Did you completely miss my last response to you? , I said “I will answer question when I am finished”. Obviously you completely missed what I said. Any way here I am. At it again.
Again you obviously don’t read. Go back and read http://islamtoday.net/english/discover_islam.cfm?cat_id=6&sub_cat_id=48He never gives any value to Individual freedoms of religion, speech of thought. He only places value on Security and stability. In every post you accuse me of not reading. I have proved that I do read. You have proved that you do not.
The Islamic government is not a theocracy, which is purely western term. Again you need to consult a dictionary. It may be a “Western Term” but it is a term that accurately describes an Islamic government.
We are talking about the laws of the Islamic state, not the malpractice of Islam in some countries with Muslim majority. I think this is about the 50 time I have heard this excuse. So what do you want to talk about your Utopia that never has or never will exist? I talking about life, the way it is, not some Picasso version of it. Do you want to discuss reality of fiction?Again the stupidity of “There has never been a case of an educated practicing Muslim leaving Islam.” If you truly believe that, than I have a bridge I would like to sell you.
Did I ever say that? You assume that everything I posted was in response to you and only you. Wrong again. I was responding to many different posts. I did not keep track of who posted what. But this on is for you. I have only responded to you.

Wilber

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello Wilber,

No one would kill you for your personal decision. True, kind of. But if anyone’s religious freedom is threatened, then everyone’s freedom is threatened. I believe everyone should share the same freedoms.

Like I already said, individual freedoms are balanced with the rights of the society.

Do you believe that not every one should have the same basic freedoms? Should freedoms differ from one country to another? Shouldn’t basic freedoms be universal? Is freedom of religion not a basic freedom?

Yes, I believe that everyone has the same basics freedoms, however freedom is not absolute, it has reasonable limits depending on the proportionality test. And freedom is restricted by context too; sometimes ones actions can be more dangerous in one context than in another, hence restrictions vary accordingly.

[/B]Islam does not simply say 'we are right, all others are wrong'.You dance around the statement but in fact Islam clams “There is no God but Allah”. So you claim that you are right and everyone else is wrong.

Did you ignore the rest of what I wrote?!

Islam does not simply say 'we are right, all others are wrong'. The Qur'an does not simply say 'we are right, all others are wrong'. Neither did the Prophet pbuh. Instead Islam calls all human beings to use their intellect which God has blessed them with and reflect on the universe so that they may realize that the only true path in this life is submission to the One True God who created everything. That is exactly what Islam is. It is incorrect to suggest that Islam is one religion of many since the meaning of Islam is submission to God and this is the only path for those who acknowledge the existence of God.​

To “Fear of the hear-after keeps many in line but currently the only religion that uses physical fear is Islam.” You responded “False” but that is exactly what killing apostates is.

Will you try to understand the issue of killing apostates?! You continue to ignore my explanation and then keep bringing up the same issue!

You think that if a Muslim changes their personal beliefs they get executed just for that, right? WRONG.

Let me make this very clear to you - if someone changes their personal beliefs - no punishment from the Islamic state. If someone poses a threat to society, then there is action from the Islamic state.

They may not but they do impact your image in the mind of the non-Muslims and the lack of condemnation of them also has a major impact.

False claim. See the end of my post here:
http://www.islamicboard.com/176386-post34.html

When you add justification for killing people for exercising there freedoms, it only gets worse.

I never justified killing people for excericising their personal freedom because Islam doesn't do that in the first place.

NO ONE IS KILLED SIMPLY FOR EXCERCISING PERSONAL FREEDOM. PUNISHMENTS ARE ONLY GIVEN BY THE ISLAMIC STATE WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL POSES A THREAT TO SOCIETY.​

Are you clear on this point? Someone is not killed simply because they change their personal beliefs. Someone is only punished when they pose a threat to society.

From http://www.load-islam.com/C/rebuttals/Misquoted/#13
The Islamic State is not permitted to attack non-Muslims who are not hostile but they did.

You've committed the logical fallacy of confusing the actions of a few sinful Muslims with the Islamic teachings. Why not bring an example?

But the history that I read tells a totally different story.

From your post it is evident that you are not only unaware of Islamic history but Islamic teachings in general. What makes matters worse is that you show no desire to seek to understand the other perspective.

The amount of taxes should be something negotiated and fixed to the satisfaction of the leaders of those being taxed. You make it sound like an equal negotiation. A surrendering partner is not an equal partner. They would agree to do what ever they had to do to stay alive. I, as most, would prefer massage taxation to death. Not a tough choice.

Can you provide ANY evidence that the Islamic state is to threaten the non-muslim citizens with death?!

The Prophet Muhammad pbuh said concerning non-muslim citizens of the Islamic state:

The one who wrongs him or impairs his right or overworks him or forcibly takes something from him, I will be his prosecutor on the Day of Judgment. (Sunan Abi Dawud, Sunan An-Nasa'i)​

Massive taxation is only one, and it is truly one.

There is no such thing as massive taxation in Islam. I already debunked your misconceptions on Jizyah so why do you repeat them??

I’m referring to everyone who instantly after surrendering chose Islam over death or taxes.

No one suddenly converted to Islam after conquest! Besides, any such conversion would be invalid. Islam does not accept the conversion when it is forced.

And is there any country that doesn't punish citizens who do not pay tax? Please tell me, I'd love to see this place.

You would know that there has never been a case in the history of Islam where an educated Muslim, without any misconceptions, has abandoned Islam because they feel the religion is inadequate or flawed. Dream on. No open minded intelligent person could ever make such a statement.

Are you incapable of refuting my statement?

I CHALLENGE YOU TO PROVIDE ME WITH EVEN ONE EXAMPLE OF A WELL-EDUCATED MUSLIM LEAVING THE RELIGION AFTER FINDING IT FLAWED OR INADEQUATE​

That is my challenge to you. Let's see if you are capable of answering it.

There are of course many rational proofs. You seriously need to consult a dictionary.

rational based on or in accordance with reason or logic.
proof evidence or argument establishing the truth of a statement.

I repeat "there are of course many rational proofs".

Islam does not deny these freedoms. Come on man. Some one exercises freedom or religion, speech and thought, they he is killed, depriving him the greatest freedom of all, the freedom to live.

Listen man, this is the umpteenth time I'm having to tell you, no one is killed simply for excercising freedom. The state only takes action against those who pose a threat to society.

-case 1: some guy changes his personal beliefs and wakes up one day and decides there is no God - does the Islamic state hunt him down and execute him? NO.
-case 2: some guy leaves the religion and publicly begins to incite civil unrest - does the Islamic state take action? Yes.

He never gives any value to Individual freedoms of religion, speech of thought.

WRONG. Individual freedoms are balanced in every modern society with the rights and security of the public. I've said this at least a thousand times, which makes it more than evident who isn't reading.

The Islamic government is not a theocracy, which is purely western term. Again you need to consult a dictionary. It may be a “Western Term” but it is a term that accurately describes an Islamic government.

You need to read up on the links I give you:
http://www.islamicboard.com/world-affairs/1994-islamic-state-conceptual-analysis.html

We are talking about the laws of the Islamic state, not the malpractice of Islam in some countries with Muslim majority. I think this is about the 50 time I have heard this excuse. So what do you want to talk about your Utopia that never has or never will exist?

You've just negated your entire argument here. Your problem is not with Islam, but the malpractice of some Muslims. I'm discussing Islamic law here, and now you have just admitted that you have no objections against Islamic law. Thank you for falsifying your own argument.

Again the stupidity of “There has never been a case of an educated practicing Muslim leaving Islam.” If you truly believe that, than I have a bridge I would like to sell you.

So instead of refuting my statements with evidence, you call me stupid. Wonderful; you really are an opne-minded individual, aren't you wilber?

Did I ever say that? You assume that everything I posted was in response to you and only you.

That was from one of my posts.

Unfortunately Wilber, this post is not much better than your last one. You continue to advance your misconceptions about Islamic law, calling others stupid, while ignoring the explanations they give you. I'm afraid that I have given you too many opportunities wilber. If you continue with this close-minded attitude then your stay on the forum will be short-lived.

Regards

 

[wilberhum]

Ansar Al-‘Adi
Like I already said, individual freedoms are balanced with the rights of the society. Yes I know that is what you said, that is not what http://www.load-islam.com/C/rebuttals/Misquoted/#13 Says. So there is a difference between what they say and what you say. So who is the authority? Whose opinion is most accurate?
Yes, I believe that everyone has the same basics freedoms, however… Then you go on to explain how basic freedoms are not universal. I guess that is something that we can only agree to disagree about. I strongly believe that everyone has the same freedoms and they are will covered in the United Nations “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”. Have a read. You won’t see vague exceptions or except when, statements. If you have a problem with what is contained in the declaration, then you have a problem with human rights and equality. Why not have a read and tell me where the 48 nations that signed it went wrong.
It is incorrect to suggest that Islam is one religion of many since the meaning of Islam is submission to God and this is the only path for those who acknowledge the existence of God. Just another way of saying “My religion is right therefore all others are wrong”. But it is a mute point, at least with me, because I think they all got it wrong.
Will you try to understand the issue of killing apostates?! You continue to ignore my explanation and then keep bringing up the same issue! I understand the issue. What makes you think I don’t understand? Is it because some say it is wrong, while others say it is right, while some give sad excuses and non relevant reasons on the matter? It is not confusing at all. All Muslims don’t agree on everything. Like all groups of any kind, you will always get a variance in attitudes, assumptions and understandings.
If someone poses a threat to society, then there is action from the Islamic state. Now all you have to do is define a” threat to society”. According to http://www.load-islam.com/C/rebuttals/Misquoted/#13, an apostate is. Any one not pulling the party line could be considered a threat and the list goes on and on.
The lack of condemnation is a general statement and not directed at you personally. If you interoperated it as a direct comment about you, I apologize and am sorry. So let me make it clear. I personally see, what I conceder, a great lacking in condemnation against the individuals and groups that Muslims clamed to have hijack there religion from the Muslim community at large. I seldom see condemnation of those that preach and teach hate in the name of Allah.
You've committed the logical fallacy of confusing the actions of a few sinful Muslims with the Islamic teachings. So if it is bad, it is “a few sinful Muslims”, if it is good then it is Islam. My only problem with this is that I here Muslims quoting from the Quran to justify actions that I conceder evil. So is there nothing wrong with Christianity? Only a few sinful Christians? So no condemnation of Christianity for the Crusades? Just condemnation of a few sinful Christians?
From your post it is evident that you are not only unaware of Islamic history. Not true, I have read a lot about your history. But for historical sources, I use sources whose purpose is to provide historical information. I don’t use sources whose purpose in to promote or condemn Islam.
What makes matters worse is that you show no desire to seek to understand the other perspective. I think I have a good perspective about people who want to deprive others of there freedoms. The history of mankind is filled with examples and reasons.
Can you provide ANY evidence that the Islamic state is to threaten the non-Muslim citizens with death?!If we continue, I will. But first give me names of countries that you conceder to be an Islamic state. There is no point in researching only to be tolled “That’s not an Islamic State, that’s just a country with a majority of Muslims”
There is no such thing as massive taxation in Islam. I already debunked your misconceptions on Jizyah so why do you repeat them??Debunked, no; denied, yes. I read once that the standard Jizyah tax doubled the tax on the non-Muslim community. It was to be enough to cause humiliation. And it was substantial enough that the rest of the world demanded its repeal with such fervor that the Islamic governments gave in.
No one suddenly converted to Islam after conquest! Besides, any such conversion would be invalid. Islam does not accept the conversion when it is forced. There are always differences between what should be done and what is done. There is frequently a difference in how a law was intended to be used and how it is/was used. The world is full of examples.
I CHALLENGE YOU TO PROVIDE ME WITH EVEN ONE EXAMPLE OF A WELL-EDUCATED MUSLIM LEAVING THE RELIGION AFTER FINDING IT FLAWED OR INADEQUATERemember: MODERATOR'S COMMENT: YOU ARE FREE TO ASK QUESTIONS BUT PLEASE DO NOT COPY ANTI-ISLAMIC ARTICLES!I would be required to go to an anti-Islamic web site and copying people’s reasons for leaving Islam. That would truly be a violation of the comment. Besides, I detest all places whose purpose is to promote hate. I do not frequent them or reference them. So for several reasons, I decline the challenge and leave it to intelligence to answer the question.
I repeat "there are of course many rational proofs". An example would be nice. Got one?Some guy leaves the religion and publicly begins to incite civil unrest - does the Islamic state take action? Yes. So then apostasy has nothing to do with is? The crime is inciting civil unrest. So why are there apostasy laws? Inciting civil unrest laws should cover the problem. What civil unrest was the poor Afghani man causing? The clerics were not calling for his head because he caused civil unrest. Your claim does not match the facts.
Again and Again you obviously don’t read. Go back and read http://islamtoday.net/english/discover_islam.cfm?cat_id=6&sub_cat_id=48 Don’t tell me it is balanced; show me where it is balanced. Remember this is a site that YOU pointed me to. So show me where it places any value on Freedom of Religion, Speech, or Thought. Are you going to go read or are you just going to continue to deny what is not contained there?
http://www.islamicboard.com/world-affairs/1994-islamic-state-conceptual-analysis.html is quite a read, interesting too. But it does not change the fact that it is a theocracy, at least in the real world.
Your problem is not with Islam, but the malpractice of some Muslims. That’s an answer to “So what do you want to talk about your Utopia that never has or never will exist?” Would you mind answering the question?So course there is the underlining implication of how I feel about Islam and Muslims. So let me make my feelings clear. I have never met a Muslim I did not like. I think there are good and bad Muslims as there are good and bad people in every group. I think Islam is like all religions. You can use it to make you better or you can use it to justify your evil. I think that people that use religion to justify restrictions on human rights and equality, fall into the later group.
I'm discussing Islamic law here. And where is this law practiced? In Utopia? Are we talking about laws that are not enforced anywhere in this world? If they don’t exist anywhere, why the discussion? I don’t sight any of the laws that were to be enforced in Utopia.
You really are an open-minded individual, aren't you Wilber? I call a spade a spade; I don’t call it a shovel. I’m fully open to intelligent statements. I don’t accept little green men on Mars either. If that makes me closed minded, then I guess I am.
If you continue with this close-minded attitude then your stay on the forum will be short-lived.And now threats. Kind of though defending the party line with some one that will not toe the party line? You have the right and you have the power.

No need for threats, just ask me to go away and I will. If you block me, I will conceder you a coward. If you just ask me to stay off the form, I will respect you and comply with your request.

Wilber

 

[Syed Nizam]

Wilbur,

About Jizya, may i asked u where u get ur information on it? Whatever sources that u may have used to learned about Jizya, please compare the information with the one provide in this websites. Hopes it helps....

Islam Online - Fatwa

Clearly then u must know that in within an Islamic country with Sharia Law, the muslims have to pay Zakat & the non-muslim have to pay the Jizya. And i do believe that the ratio between those two are the same (correct me if i'm wrong). So, where DOES that differs in any way from the modern taxes system being implemented in the current world where muslims or non-muslims are concerned?

 

[Syed Nizam]

Quoted from:
Islam - Faith and Democracy: Glossary -- Jizyah

Glossary -- Jizyah
A tax paid by non-Muslims living in a Muslim state.

Since the non-Muslims are exempt from military service and taxes imposed on Muslims, they must pay this tax to compensate. It guarantees them security and protection. If the state cannot protect those who paid jizyah, then the amount they paid is returned to them.

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hello Wilber,

Like I already said, individual freedoms are balanced with the rights of the society. Yes I know that is what you said, that is not what http://www.load-islam.com/C/rebuttals/Misquoted/#13 Says. So there is a difference between what they say and what you say. So who is the authority? Whose opinion is most accurate?

Good grief, Wilber! I wrote the article!

Please quote me specifically what I said in the article that you feel contradicts what I said now that individual freedoms are balanced with the rights of the society. I am amazed at the lengths you will go to to evade my arguments claiming that they are negated by my own article!

Yes, I believe that everyone has the same basics freedoms, however… Then you go on to explain how basic freedoms are not universal.

ABSOLUTE. Basic freedoms are not absolute.

If you have a problem with what is contained in the declaration, then you have a problem with human rights and equality.

Is it not bigoted to think that one's interpretation of human rights is correct and all others are incorrect?

Just another way of saying “My religion is right therefore all others are wrong”.

You're not thinking about what I wrote. You believe in God, right? Tell me, is there any way of life that can be acceptable to God other than submission to Him? Obviously the answer is that if there is a God, submission to Him is the true path. That is what Islam means - submission to God.

2:130-131. 130. And who turns away from the path of Abraham except one who befools himself? Truly, We chose him in this world and verily, in the Hereafter he will be among the righteous. When his Lord said to him, "Submit (Ar. Aslim*)!" He said, "I have submitted myself (Aslamto*) to the Lord of the Universe.

*The verb for Islam; submission

For one who acknowledges the existence of God, can there be any other path except submission to God?

I understand the issue. What makes you think I don’t understand?

Your comments.

If someone poses a threat to society, then there is action from the Islamic state. Now all you have to do is define a” threat to society”.

Good! This is what I intended, but you haven't allowed the discussion to progress because you continually kept going back to pt. 1.

Now that we have understood that the Islamic society takes action against those who pose a threat to society, we can progress to the next level of the discussion (finally!) where we can discuss who qualifies as a threat.

According to http://www.load-islam.com/C/rebuttals/Misquoted/#13, an apostate is.

That's my article. Please point out to me where I said in the article that someone who merely changes personal beliefs without disturbing the public society is considered a threat.

I personally see, what I conceder, a great lacking in condemnation against the individuals and groups that Muslims clamed to have hijack there religion from the Muslim community at large. I seldom see condemnation of those that preach and teach hate in the name of Allah.

First of all Wilber, thank you for your change in attitude, which makes it a lot easier to discuss with you.

The problem here is what we call the spotlight fallacy. Individuals construct their generalizations on what has been reported in the media. But as I pointed out in another thread:

but I find that when we have 1 nutcase calling for terrorist attacks, and 1000 Imaams condemning such a person, the media will focus on the 1 nutcase. For example, how many people heard about Yusuf Islam who recieved the Man of Peace award 2004?

To give another example, when the London Bombings occurred, a Muslim organization in North America immediately gathered dozens of Imaams from all over the country and they issued a joint statement condemning the bombing. The only media coverage of this was a single quotation in a local newspaper who sought to 'balance' this feedback by quoting one extremist and one anti-islamist.

Another example - the RIS conference that occurs in Toronto in the winter gathers tens of thousands of Muslims who attend lectures from various Muslim leaders from all over the globe, all voicing strong condemnation of such violent acts. I have seen barely any coverage of such events in the media, yet if we have even 1 person calling for violent attacks they appear on the front page.

So the problem here is that the condemnation doesn't getr through to the general public. Virtually every Muslim scholar has condemned the terrorist attacks around the world but the general public in the west are aware of that, since it doesn't come through in the media.

So if it is bad, it is “a few sinful Muslims”, if it is good then it is Islam.

No, if it has its basis in the Qur'an and the Sunnah then it is Islam. If it is just some actions done by some Muslims, it is not.

So is there nothing wrong with Christianity? Only a few sinful Christians? So no condemnation of Christianity for the Crusades? Just condemnation of a few sinful Christians?

I wouldn't blame the religion of Christianity for the crusades, that isn't fair.

What makes matters worse is that you show no desire to seek to understand the other perspective. I think I have a good perspective about people who want to deprive others of there freedoms.

Dear Wilber, I already told you that Islam does not deprive or remove freedoms but like ever modern society it balances them with the welfare of the society. If you are already satisifed with your negative perception of Islam and are not willing to learn the perspective of Muslims, then why bother coming here? Seriously, this forum is for dialogue, not advancing one's own negative perceptions about others. Here we have to share views, not just force ours upon others without listening to what they have to say.

If we continue, I will. But first give me names of countries that you conceder to be an Islamic state.

There is no country today which qualifies as an Islamic state; the Islamic state is a khilafa.

Debunked, no; denied, yes. I read once that the standard Jizyah tax doubled the tax on the non-Muslim community. It was to be enough to cause humiliation.

First of all, if you are satisfied with the negative distortions of Islamic teachings you hear from others and don't wish to learn the real deal from Muslims as to what Islam teaches, then why bother dialoguing? Secondly, you are again assuming that any Muslim action equals an Islamic teaching. I quoted the juristic evidence which clarifies that the Jizyah tax is to be taken is consideration with the means of the non-muslim citizens and it should be negotiated with them. I also quoted you a statement from thje Prophet Muhammad pbuh himself where he said concerning non-muslim citizens of the Islamic state:

The one who wrongs him or impairs his right or overworks him or forcibly takes something from him, I will be his prosecutor on the Day of Judgment. (Sunan Abi Dawud, Sunan An-Nasa'i)​

Muslims are not allowed to abuse or oppress the non-muslim citizens of an Islamic state.

I would be required to go to an anti-Islamic web site and copying people’s reasons for leaving Islam.

Anyone can write whatever they want on the internet. I personally have seen some non-muslims confessing to fabricating apostasy stories, and others lying about their religion. Even on this forum we've had some non-muslims who pretend to be Muslims in order to malign Islam with their comments.

But like I said we see many Priests, Rabbis, and other educated leaders converting to Islam but we have never seen educated practicing Muslims leaving their religion in the same way.

An example would be nice. Got one?

Sure. Someone might think that there is no soul because science can explain all human faculties; all you need to do is point out otherwise with the example of coherent reasoning (see the latest posts in the thread entitled 'Atheism' in the comparative religion section for more info).

So then apostasy has nothing to do with is? The crime is inciting civil unrest.

You're right that the issue is not really the change in the person's personal belief but the harm they are causing to the stability, security or morality of the society. That is what I have been trying to explain to you all along. Calling it just an 'apostasy law' can be misleading; it needs to be explained in the context of civil unrest, rebellion and treason. I tried to present this context to you but you refused three times to listen to it. That is why it has taken so long to convey this simple point.

The Islamic law relating to the issue of apostasy has to do with civil unrest, rebellion, and treason not a private change in conviction.

What civil unrest was the poor Afghani man causing?

I've commented on the Afghani case earlier in this thread. Remember, actions of some Muslims do not equal Islamic law.

Again and Again you obviously don’t read. Go back and read http://islamtoday.net/english/discover_islam.cfm?cat_id=6&sub_cat_id=48

What would ylou like to discuss with regard to the above article?

That’s an answer to “So what do you want to talk about your Utopia that never has or never will exist?”

I wanted to talk about the Islamic system as it is. And yes it has existed for centuries. As for what will happen in the future, that is up to God, not you.

And now threats.

It is not a threat it is a kind request for you to either engage in respectful open-minded dialogue which involes listening to the views of others, or to leave and propagate these negative misinformed perspections of Islam elsewhere.

Regards

 

[Syed Nizam]

Wilbur,

Basic freedoms are CERTAINLY not universal. And ur reference to the romantiscms of the United Nations “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” is debatable. Consider this:

1. Article 5
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

2. Article 9
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

3. Article 11
(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.

(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

4. Article 15.
(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Honestly Wilbur, has it been achieved in the REAL world? By the UN or by the US who are the self-declared champions of democracy & human rights? Just study the history of the UN to answer that for yourself. Need I say more?

 

[wilberhum]

Syed Nizam
I got my information about Jizyah from multiple places at multiple times. I do a lot of reading about a lot of things. Yesterday I tried to get some specific information to back up my statement. I was unable to fine any real information (Not information from bigoted sites) but was not successful. For that, I feel a bit embarrassed. I would like to look further and debate you, but first I would like to make sure were using the same definitions. I would like to avoid the debacle with my last discussion.

When I talk about an Islamic State, I’m talking about countries that conceder themselves Islamic and the world at large conceders them Islamic. I’m not talking about some mythological state that does not and did not exist.

When I talk about the excessive taxes laved or any other item that I conceder discriminatory, I’m talking about what was practiced, not what is prescribed.

When I talk about Suria Law, I’m talking about how it is implemented and used, I’m not talking about legal knowledge that takes years of studying to understand, and not am I talking about how it would affect some mythological society.

So if you want to talk about the “Real World” and not “Fantasy Land”, I would enjoy the challenge.
Waiting to here from you,
Wilber

 

[wilberhum]

Syed Nizam
About the United Nations “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”. Of course it has never been achieved, and it never will be. As there are evil people, there are evil nations. Even generally good people do bad things and generally good nations do bad things. There are many problems with the UN and there are many things wrong with the US. There are multiple things that I am at odds with my government about. Iraq, Israel and Guantanamo are just a few. Because we have problems there are more reasons to try to improve. I defend what is good about my country and I’m critical what I feel it is wrong and try to do my little bit to make it better. I don’t support my country, right or wrong. Do you think we should abandon all efforts to improve the world because it will never be perfect? Did you list the specific articles because they are bad and should be removed or because we haven’t achieved them? I guess I just don’t understand where you are coming from.
What are you trying to say?
Wilber

 

[Syed Nizam]

Wilbur,

I'm not saying that everything about the USA are BAD, & i'm not even implying that everything about the muslims are GOOD. Never will i fall into that narrow kind of prejudice view.

And even now, i dont even consider my expressing of views as a form of debate.....

 

[Syed Nizam]

Do you think we should abandon all efforts to improve the world because it will never be perfect? Did you list the specific articles because they are bad and should be removed or because we haven’t achieved them? I guess I just don’t understand where you are coming from.
What are you trying to say?
Wilber

.....NO, i do not believe that we all should abandon all efforts to improve the world at large either. I'm merely listing the specific articles just to show you that there are no such things like a PERFECT plans, the best there are only PERFECT intentions.