No compulsion in religion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jd7
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 97
  • Views Views 13K
Jizya serves a symbolic role as well i.e. it demonstrates that the Dhimmi is subdued. :raging:

Dhimmi is a bit of a complex issue. The Hadith and the Sharia laws do speak of the maximum and extreme point which are the maximum of what should be enforced. As a result there are differences in different countries and differences between the treatment of long term residents compared to recent arrivals for whatever reason.

the best choice would be to look at different countries and try to understand what is done and why.



Iran comes as a big surprise:


Iran remains home to Jewish enclave
By Barbara Demick
KNIGHT-RIDDER
September 30,1997

TEHRAN - The Jewish women in the back rows of the synagogue wear long garments in the traditional Iranian style, but instead of chadors, their heads are covered with cheerful, flowered scarves. The boys in their skullcaps, with Hebrew prayer books tucked under their arms, scamper down the aisles to grab the best spots near the lush, turquoise Persian carpet of the altar. This is Friday night, Shabbat - Iranian style, and the synagogue in an affluent neighborhood of North Tehran is filled to capacity with more than 400 worshipers.

It is one of the many paradoxes of the Islamic Republic of Iran that this most virulent anti-Israeli country supports by far the largest Jewish population of any Muslim country. While Jewish communities in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Egypt, Morocco and Algeria have all but vanished, Iran is home to 25,000 - some here say 35,000 - Jews. The Jewish population is less than half the number that lived here before the Islamic revolution of 1979. But the Jews have tried to compensate for their diminishing numbers by adopting a new religious fervor. ''The funny thing is that before the Islamic revolution, you would see maybe 20 old men in the synagogue,'' whispers Nahit Eliyason, 48, as she climbs over four other women to find one of the few vacant seats. ''Now the place is full. You can barely find a seat.'' Parvis Yashaya, a film producer who heads Tehran's Jewish community, adds: ''we are smaller, but we are stronger in some ways.''

Tehran has 11 functioning synagogues, many of them with Hebrew schools. It has two kosher restaurants, and a Jewish hospital, an old-age home and a cemetery. There is a Jewish representative in the Iranian parliament. There is a Jewish library with 20,000 titles, its reading room decorated with a photograph of the Ayatollah Khomeini. Khomeini protection Iran's Jewish community is confronted by contradictions. Many of the prayers uttered in synagogue, for instance, refer to the desire to see Jerusalem again. Yet there is no postal service or telephone contact with Israel, and any Iranian who dares travel to Israel faces imprisonment and passport confiscation. ''We are Jews, not Zionists. We are a religious community, not a political one,'' Yashaya said.

Before the revolution, Jews were well-represented among Iran's business elite, holding key posts in the oil industry, banking and law, as well as in the traditional bazaar. The wave of anti-Israeli sentiment that swept Iran during the revolution, as well as large-scale confiscation of private wealth, sent thousands of the more affluent Jews fleeing to the United States or Israel. Those remaining lived in fear of pogroms, or massacres. But Khomeini met with the Jewish community upon his return from exile in Paris and issued a ''fatwa'' decreeing that the Jews were to be protected. Similar edicts also protect Iran's tiny Christian minority.

Just as it radically transformed Muslim society, the revolution changed the Jews. Families that had been secular in the 1970s started keeping kosher and strictly observing rules against driving on Shabbat. They stopped going to restaurants, cafes and cinemas - many such establishments were closed down - and the synagogue perforce became the focal point of their social lives. Iranian Jews say they socialize far less with Muslims now than before the revolution. As a whole, they occupy their own separate space within the rigid confines of the Islamic republic, a protected yet precarious niche. Jewish women, like Muslim women, are required by law to keep their heads covered, although most eschew the chador for a simple scarf. But Jews, unlike Muslims, can keep small flasks of home-brewed wine or arragh to drink within the privacy of their homes - in theory, for religious purposes. Some Hebrew schools are coed, and men and women dance with each other at weddings, practices strictly forbidden for Muslims.

Source: http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/iranianjews.html

Iranian Jews refuse cash 'bribe' to move to Israel

IMEMC

17 July, 2007

In Iran today, the country’s Jewish minority unanimously rejected cash offers from supporters of the state of Israel to leave Iran and move to Israel.

The Israeli government promised to provide a package of housing and jobs for the twenty-five-thousand Iranian Jews. A special fund created by Israel supporters promised a ten-thousand-dollar cash award for any Iranian Jew who moved to Israel.

The Society of Iranian Jews dismissed this move as a bribe. Iran's sole Jewish member of parliament, Morris Motamed, said the offer was insulting to Jewish Iranians.

Instead of taking the pro-Israel group up on its offer, the community of Iranian Jews instead took a loyalty pledge to their home country of Iran.

Iran's Jewish population has dwindled from around eighty-thousand at the time of the 1979 Islamic revolution. But, it remains the largest of any Middle Eastern country apart from Israel. Jews have lived in Iran since at least 700 B-C.

Source: http://www.jerusalemites.org/News%20In%20English/english/2007/July/17.htm


Iranian Jews Reject Outside Calls To Leave
Push From Israel, U.S. Groups Falls Flat Despite Ahmadinejad
By Marc Perelman
Fri. Jan 12, 2007
Article tools

* Text size: Larger | Smaller
* Print this article Print this article
* Email to a friend Email this article
* more article by... Other articles by Marc Perelman
* More in ... More in News


A campaign to convince Iran’s 25,000 Jews to flee the country has stalled, with most opting to stay in their native homeland despite President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s Holocaust denial and anti-Israeli speeches.

In recent months, the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, Israeli officials and some American Jewish communal leaders have urged Iranian Jews to leave. But so far, despite generally being allowed to travel to Israel and emigrate abroad, Iranian Jews have stayed put.

Source: http://www.forward.com/articles/iranian-jews-reject-outside-calls-to-leave-1/


Perhaps the life of a Dhimmi has appeal to some people?
 
LIE.
:sl: bro,
The people who made this claim should bring their evidence.
*****************


[/COLOR]​
[/INDENT]For information on Jizyah, please read the following:
http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/archives/2005/jizya-in-islam/
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/...h-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503544994

http://www.islamicboard.com/miscellaneous/16133-jizya-dhimmis.html
[/INDENT]
You should take your demand to BBC.

I bring you an Unbiased source, well unless you buy the "Western Media hates Islam" conspiracy theories, and you bring totally biased sources.

Thats kind of like asking the Pope if Jesus is god.
 
BBC reports 'littered with errors'
By Chris Hastings, Media Correspondent
Last Updated: 8:16pm BST 03/07/2004



A significant number of BBC news reports are untrustworthy and littered with errors because the corporation's journalists fail to check their facts, according to e-mails sent by one of the BBC's most senior news managers. His messages reveal that the credibility of the news service is "on the line" because of a climate of sloppiness.

The internal memos, which have been obtained by The Telegraph, highlight concerns about the standard of journalism on local BBC television and radio, as well as on the BBC's flagship News Online service. They suggest that the corporation is struggling to keep its promise to improve the standards of its news services following ****ing criticisms levelled against it by the Hutton inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly.

The BBC was criticised by Lord Hutton after it emerged that Andrew Gilligan, the Radio 4 Today programme journalist - whose flawed story about the background to the Government's claims on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction was at the centre of the inquiry - had filed his report without it being checked by station managers.

advertisement
The leaked e-mails sent by Hugh Berlyn, an assistant editor of BBC News Online, show that despite the furore surrounding the Gilligan report, dozens of "unvetted" stories appear on the internet every day. The result is a string of stories that are, at best, littered with errors and, at worst, inaccurate and potentially libellous.

In an e-mail last October, Mr Berlyn said journalists were not showing their reports to managers, who are supposed to check them in accordance with BBC rules. He wrote: "Yesterday we carried out a study of how many of your stories were being properly checked by a second pair of eyes before publication. To my surprise and concern, more than 60 stories around the country were apparently published without being second-checked."

Another e-mail, sent in February, said that the number of "justified complaints" about the lack of accuracy in spelling, names, grammar or simple detail was growing. Mr Berlyn told staff that he received dozens of complaints a day. "I really think the level of complaints is such that our credibility is on the line and that cannot be allowed to continue."

Although his memos were addressed to staff at BBC Online, they highlight concern about local studios, which provide the internet service with much of its material. He said that it was no longer acceptable for News Online staff to justify mistakes by saying: "That's what was in the radio and TV copy." He wrote: "We have to accept that the standard of journalism in local radio and regional TV is not the same as that required by News Online."

BBC Online is the most popular website in Europe, receiving 1.9 billion hits a month. It has two million internet pages.

A BBC spokesman insisted last night that it had confidence in its journalists. "Since these e-mails were written, tighter procedures for checking copy have been put in place." The BBC has committed itself to implementing measures recommended by Ron Neil, the former head of news. Mr Neil, who was asked to investigate news services following the Hutton Inquiry, has recommended the establishment of a journalism college and expansion of local news

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...bbc04.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/07/04/ixhome.html

BBC scandal not a first
29/01/2004 13:24 - (SA)









BBC chair quits over Kelly


London - The BBC, Britain's venerable broadcaster, has become the latest media institution to come under the spotlight for its reporting practices, joining other respected organisations such as the New York Times or the German magazine Stern who have come under heavy criticism in recent times.

The scandal surrounding the BBC concerns a radio report by one of its star journalists, Andrew Gilligan, who claimed that the government of British Prime Minister Tony Blair deliberately exaggerated the threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction before the US-led invasion on March 20.

British weapons expert David Kelly committed suicide in July 2003 after being exposed as the source of the BBC report and the ensuing controversy surrounding his death threatened to bring down Blair's government.

But a judge investigating Kelly's death cleared Blair and his government on Wednesday of any wrongdoing while delivering a scathing report against the broadcaster.

The judge's findings dealt a heavy blow to the BBC's credibility and image and led to the resignation of its chairperson Gavyn Davies.

Last May, the New York Times, one of the leading papers in the United States, also had to deal with the repercussions surrounding a scandal involving one of its prominent national reporters who fabricated stories.

Gerald Boyd, the paper's managing editor and Howell Raines, the executive editor, quit in the wake of the scandal.

Another major US paper, USA Today, came under the spotlight earlier this month after star reporter Jack Kelley was forced to resign over the accuracy of some of his reporting.

In 1981, the Washington Post gave back a Pulitzer because reporter Janet Cooke had cooked up a story about an eight-year-old heroin addict who didn't exist.

In France, star TV anchorman Patrick Poivre d'Arvor, or PPDA as he is known, came under intense criticism in 1991 for a false interview with Cuban leader Fidel Castro.

The reporter appeared on television on December 16, 1991 claiming to have seen Castro in Cuba a few days earlier and airing an exclusive report that proved false.

In August 1984, the German magazine Stern published the now celebrated Hitler diaries, leading to the prosecution of former reporter Gerd Heidemann for fraud after he collected 600 000 for selling 60 diaries purporting to have been written by the Nazi leader.

Although they were authenticated by historians, they proved to have been elaborate hoax perpetrated by forger Konrad Kujau.
http://www.news24.com/News24/AnanziArticle/0,,2-10-1462_1476003,00.html

there you have it folks the infallible, unbiased BBC!


cheers
 
there you have it folks the infallible, unbiased BBC!
cheers
There is no such thing as a totally unbiased source. You know it, I know it,
The world knows.

But there are sources that are totally biased, you know it, I know it, the world knows it.
 
Which happened to be wrong.

Through no fault of it's own, of course. Simple misinformation.
Ouch, is that a gotya or what? Well done Osman. :peace:

Too the news is not perfect as nothing man produces is.

But if my bias is against X and I'm reporting on Y, then my bias should not impact my report.
 
Did Moses teach the Hebrews that there was no compulsion in religion? Were the Hebrews ever instructed to purge themselves of those who not of the same faith?
Were there ever threats of punishment for the Hebrew people if they didn’t purge themselves of other faiths?


hola

i don't think Moses ever taught such a thing... the Hebrews were ordered to purge themselves of unbelievers in various different scenarios and there were threats of punishment for not doing so.

the best example i can think of is how King Saul lost his throne. he attacked people who were under what was called 'the ban.' when people are under the ban that means everything must be destroyed... men, women, children, livestock, all of the structures, all of the gold and treasures. i forget who precisely King Saul attacked, but he did not destroy everything and allowed people to live or allowed treasure to be taken, it resulted in God cursing him and taking away his crown.

if you read the military accounts of Joshua in the bible you will understand the ban.

que Dios te bendiga
 
something that is rarely discussed is that "no compulsion in religion" doesn't seem to apply to muslims.
 
it is hard to be sure because there is no shariah state, but some muslim countries who practice it in part. (or claim to)
muslims are not allowed to become non-muslims publicly. in some places muslims are compelled to pray 5 times a day. a number of religious commandments become compulsary.
you can see some of the rules for muslims in malaysia in this thread
http://www.islamicboard.com/world-affairs/55410-malaysian-row-over-word-god.html
i may be wrong, but i think in some places i think it is easier to be non-muslim than muslim.
 
Jayda your post left me a little confused:

I don't think Moses ever taught such a thing... the Hebrews were ordered to purge themselves of unbelievers in various different scenarios and there were threats of punishment for not doing so”.

I couldn’t tell what exactly you disagreed with. Were you disagreeing with the idea of compulsion in religion being part of the Old Testament or the source of that instruction or both?

I will wait for some clarification before commenting further.


I hope I didn’t give the impression in my original post that I was trying to imply that according to Old Testament scripture that Moses was acting without a mandate from God. I also want to state that according to Old Testament scripture that the order to purge the non-Hebrews (with the exception of certain slaves) came from God, not from Moses.

Perhaps I should state it this way:

Did God of the Old Testament prescribe compulsion in religion?
 
Snake Legs, I will offer that considering Islamic rules concerning apostates, Muslims are even more so under compulsion in religion.
 
Jayda your post left me a little confused:

I don't think Moses ever taught such a thing... the Hebrews were ordered to purge themselves of unbelievers in various different scenarios and there were threats of punishment for not doing so”.

I couldn’t tell what exactly you disagreed with. Were you disagreeing with the idea of compulsion in religion being part of the Old Testament or the source of that instruction or both?

I will wait for some clarification before commenting further.


I hope I didn’t give the impression in my original post that I was trying to imply that according to Old Testament scripture that Moses was acting without a mandate from God. I also want to state that according to Old Testament scripture that the order to purge the non-Hebrews (with the exception of certain slaves) came from God, not from Moses.

Perhaps I should state it this way:

Did God of the Old Testament prescribe compulsion in religion?

hola jd7,

i mean i do not believe Moses ever taught that there is 'no compulsion in religion,' for the most part i think the hebrews considered themselves pilgrims in a lost world... they were not interested in proselytizing their religion... those who turned to God were good, but it was expected that people would follow their false gods.

either way... much to the contrary of 'no compulsion' under OT law most of the canaanite nations were under the ban... which is ethnic cleansing to such a degree you might consider it ludicrous.

in the OT it's not so much about compulsion as it is (literally) destroying any trace of non monotheistic worship...

does that make any more sense?

it might help to look up 'charem' which is the hebrew word for the ban, or to read the books i mentioned...

que Dios te bendiga
 
Ouch, is that a gotya or what? Well done Osman. :peace:

0015-1.gif
You flatter me.

But if my bias is against X and I'm reporting on Y, then my bias should not impact my report.

No doubt. But if the sources of your report about Y are ill-informed, then your report about Y would also be ill-informed. And you would not be the least bit to blame.

That would be the case even if you were a reporter who endeavours to be completely unbiased (which I have no doubt that you, sir, would be).

:)

Fond regards
 
Last edited:
Greetings jd7,

Snake Legs, I will offer that considering Islamic rules concerning apostates, Muslims are even more so under compulsion in religion.

I believe you might be ill-informed (my word of the day) about Islamic laws regarding apostasy.

If I might humbly point you to this thread:

Here

Regards
 
something that is rarely discussed is that "no compulsion in religion" doesn't seem to apply to muslims.

That is true. That is not true.











.









.

Yes we are under compulsion to worship the one God(swt). We under legal, moral and religious commitment to eternally be Muslims. We know that to leave Islam is a denial of worshipping Allaah(swt). It is felt so serious that it can be a major sin to even call a person an apostate. It takes considerable proof to show that a person has abandoned Islam.


Now can a Muslim choose to no longer be a Muslim? Yes, that is always a choice. Some do it while still retaining the name of Muslim, by refusing to follow their faith or by exempting themselves from worship. Some do it by associating themselves with another faith.

Can it be done without repercussions. Yes, even in a Shariah state if the person is not attempting to spread they converted faith to others, keeps it private and does not publicly practice and has not committed treason in the process of converting, there is no major problem, except the probable ostracizing by friends and family.

In a non Sharia country, they will be no enforceable punishment as the laws of the country must be followed. However, the person will still face the disappointment of family and friends. A revert living in a non-Sharia state faces little problems as they simply return to their old life styles most of the time.

Of course the final choice is up to the individual. the important thing is that their choice is based on full knowledge and of their own free will.
 
i didn't really want to focus on apostasy particularly. but there are situation where the gov't or the 'morality police' enforce religious duties on muslims - like ordering people to say their prayers, for example. (which seems a strange concept to me).
when i read about the laws in some muslims countries, it strikes me that non-muslims are better off when it comes to the law.
i think "no compulsion in religion" doesn't really apply to muslims - the state will enforce their religious practice and obligations.
 
i didn't really want to focus on apostasy particularly. but there are situation where the gov't or the 'morality police' enforce religious duties on muslims - like ordering people to say their prayers, for example. (which seems a strange concept to me).
when i read about the laws in some muslims countries, it strikes me that non-muslims are better off when it comes to the law.
i think "no compulsion in religion" doesn't really apply to muslims - the state will enforce their religious practice and obligations.

the pseudo religion of Xarstepistooken condones murder and in fact makes it mandatory that each citizen murder at least one person every ten years. I therefore see the USA of imposing their silly religious practices upon people and people are actually punished under law if they follow Xarstepistooken and faithfully practice their religion. People are compelled to obey the USA ritual of abstaining from murder if they choose to live in the USA. there are laws on the book that prevent people from practicing it and converts from USA mainstream will be severely punished and often face execution if they convert to Xarstepistooken and follow their faith.

Although i carried it to a rediculous extreme, the principal is the same.
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top