I have formed the view that a lot of Muslims living in the west would like to be governed by sharia law. In fact I seem to recall calls from some Muslims in the UK to be allowed to govern themselves by sharia law. Watching TV this morning and saw a report of the edict issued by the SAWT valley Taliban to judges and lawyers ordering them not to attend court telling them there is no place for them in sharia law (see above link) and I wondered how it would work in a non-tribal society. I can see that the SWAT area (apart from cell phones and kalashnikovs) looks and probably functions pretty much as it did in 7C Mecca and because of that it may be possible to function with sharia law but could it really work in a 21st century society? It starts by stopping the current legal structure (courts, judges etc) because now the local Imam is the judge. Next you scrap the ministry of the interior because the police service or whatever replaces it comes under the direction of the local imam. Now justice is dispensed according to the local Imams interpretation of the sharia law. I can’t believe that any educated 21st century person would want to live under such a nebulous, unstructured and unjust regime. I can’t believe that any educated female Muslim would want to live under a regime that would deny them all the freedoms they enjoy outside of such a system. If there’s anyone out there that would like to live under such a regime I’d love to hear your reasons.
Is it fair that according to sharia law, a muslim that leaves the religion should be killed.
yes it is fair.
you have to note that we dont believe this is our only life. we place such an importance on the afterlife which is ETERNAL. i would rather someone be put to death than spread fitnah that can lead people to leave islam which would cause a much harsher punishment in the next life.
you have to note that we dont believe this is our only life. we place such an importance on the afterlife which is ETERNAL. i would rather someone be put to death than spread fitnah that can lead people to leave islam which would cause a much harsher punishment in the next life.
Fair, but do you agree that it is not a legitimate stance to take this as a politicl position, as this pretty much makes any muslim child essentially a "slave" to their religion as if they choose not to believe it they will be put to death by the state.
I think you should grant everyone here some courtesy given how much time was expanded the span of 30+ pages and read all that was written along with the links included? I mean a simple response is given already not two posts ago!
all the best
Yes, I am going to read all that just so I can post a question...
Yes, I am going to read all that just so I can post a question...
If the question has been answered and repeatedly, then it is indeed prudent to browse the responses.. Do you have a narcissistic personality disorder or just enjoy spamming?
Do read FAQ as well (which should also cover the anti-Islamic) youtube links..
Do you think people can't google anti-Islamic rhetoric for themselves?
all the best
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
If the question has been answered and repeatedly, then it is indeed prudent to browse the responses.. Do you have a narcissistic personality disorder or just enjoy spamming?
Do read FAQ as well (which should also cover the anti-Islamic) youtube links..
Do you think people can't google anti-Islamic rhetoric for themselves?
all the best
Ok, so if someone is rebutting a point made by islam, it is anti-islamic? It seems you are uncomfortable with hearing dissenting voices and treat them as your inferiors, but that is what I would expect from someone with an obvious "holier than thou" attitude.
Ok, so if someone is rebutting a point made by islam, it is anti-islamic?
Not at all, what I find objectionable however, is making a statement such as 'he makes many mistakes' with bravado and then list a link to do your work for you.. are you not able to articulate his errors for yourself so you delegate the job to another? The whole point of being so vanguard is exhibiting a free thought not simply parroting an opposing thought -- do you think you are capable of those?
It seems you are uncomfortable with hearing dissenting voices and treat them as your inferiors, but that is what I would expect from someone with an obvious "holier than thou" attitude.
I think you are exhibiting a bit of cognitive conservatism admixed with a temper tantrum. I am not big on psychology personally, but have you heard of projection? If you feel inferior, then it is something you need to resolve on your own private time. We are not here to handle you with kid gloves until such a time your thoughts, your temperament, and your writing acquire a more mature appeal..
all the best
Last edited by جوري; 05-06-2009 at 03:40 AM.
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
Is it fair that according to sharia law, a muslim that leaves the religion should be killed.
According to one interpretation to Shariah it is. In the majority of pre-modern times the interpretation which says apostasy=death was a majority opinion, with a minority opinion that apostasy can not be judged on earth and that in treason can you execute a person.
Most modern/post modern applications of shariah follow the minority opinion.
In essence the problem with this issue is that modern muslim majority states are national (secular) states. They are not based on the principal of the "ummah". With the principal of the "ummah state" the place where apostasy and treason begin and end is blurred because it is a religious state.
format_quote Originally Posted by greenshirt
yes it is fair.
you have to note that we dont believe this is our only life. we place such an importance on the afterlife which is ETERNAL. i would rather someone be put to death than spread fitnah that can lead people to leave islam which would cause a much harsher punishment in the next life.
This is a secondary argument. It justifies the use of capital punishment rather than apostasy per se.
O my Lord,
if I worship you
from fear of hell, burn me in hell.
If I worship you
from hope of Paradise, bar me from its gates.
But if I worship you
for yourself alone, grant me then the beauty of your Face.
Greetings. It is important to note that when deriving evidence in Islam, we must look at the Qur'an and Hadeeth together, never exclusively. It is a major failing to solely rely on the Qur'an.
Hugo - yes so one cannot understand what God himself has said unless we have the hadeeth? I know this to be the Muslim position but it is not a very convincing one is it and leave open the door to preferring the hadeeth to what God has said. Surely, God can be clear?
Another important rule in understanding Islamic law is that the ambiguous (if that is an appropriate word) information is understood in light of the clear - not the other way round. Thus, I wonder how Professor Charfi would understand the following explicit Hadeeth (from the link given by sister Skye),
Hugo - Professor Chafi understands this link very well but he points out that it is the only such link, its is not a strong hadeeth and it was made by someone who was a 12 years old boy at the time he heard it. Hardly enough to start killing people for a change of religion is it?
"Whoever replaces his religion, execute him" (Bukhari, Abu Dawud)
I think there is a misunderstanding here regarding what Shariah is. I recommend the following video which sheds light on this specific issue - it begins from 3:45 onwards:
And I think the whole lecture (to be found on youtube) may very well be relevant to this thread.
Peace.
Thank you for the link I will try to look at it but I am familiar with Nawami's manual and Al-Misro's Reliance of the traveller. I would never consider myself an expert but Professor Charfi is.
hm.... (what does Quran say about that, something quite different! methinks!)
Tie up your camel; before putting your trust in Allah!
That is one of the best quotes I have seen for a long time. Its in a way like another one I saw sometime ago.
Better do a good deed near at home than go far away to burn incense. Amelia Earhart.
Incidentally, I have read both the articles referred to by Gossamer and will post a reply later but the first one is so weak its not worth the paper its written on as well as contradicting some famous scholars and the second paper. In the second references his favourite saying is '..it cannot be discussed here.." and his main argument about retaining apostasy as a crime is that others have done it in the past and the UDHR is a western invention.
Tie up your camel; before putting your trust in Allah!
That is one of the best quotes I have seen for a long time. Its in a way like another one I saw sometime ago.
Better do a good deed near at home than go far away to burn incense. Amelia Earhart.
Incidentally, I have read both the articles referred to by Gossamer and will post a reply later but the first one is so weak its not worth the paper its written on as well as contradicting some famous scholars and the second paper. In the second references his favourite saying is '..it cannot be discussed here.." and his main argument about retaining apostasy as a crime is that others have done it in the past and the UDHR is a western invention.
Not at all, what I find objectionable however, is making a statement such as 'he makes many mistakes' with bravado and then list a link to do your work for you.. are you not able to articulate his errors for yourself so you delegate the job to another? The whole point of being so vanguard is exhibiting a free thought not simply parroting an opposing thought -- do you think you are capable of those?
I think you are exhibiting a bit of cognitive conservatism admixed with a temper tantrum. I am not big on psychology personally, but have you heard of projection? If you feel inferior, then it is something you need to resolve on your own private time. We are not here to handle you with kid gloves until such a time your thoughts, your temperament, and your writing acquire a more mature appeal..
all the best
Throughout my brief times on this forum, I am constantly dumbstruck by the irony in your posts. Keep up the good work there...
Four out of 10 British Muslims want sharia law introduced into parts of the country, a survey reveals today. The ICM opinion poll also indicates that a fifth have sympathy with the "feelings and motives" of the suicide bombers who attacked London last July 7, killing 52 people, although 99 per cent thought the bombers were wrong to carry out the atrocity.
Overall, the findings depict a Muslim community becoming more radical and feeling more alienated from mainstream society, even though 91 per cent still say they feel loyal to Britain. The results of the poll, conducted for the Sunday Telegraph, came as thousands of Muslims staged a fresh protest in London yesterday against the publication of cartoons of Mohammed. In Libya, at least 10 people died in protests linked to the caricatures. And in Pakistan, a cleric was reported to have put a $1 million (£575,000) bounty on the head of the Danish cartoonist who drew the original pictures. Last night, Sadiq Khan, the Labour MP involved with the official task force set up after the July attacks, said the findings were "alarming". He added: "Vast numbers of Muslims feel disengaged and alienated from mainstream British society." Sir Iqbal Sacranie, the secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: "This poll confirms the widespread opposition among British Muslims to the so-called war on terror." The most startling finding is the high level of support for applying sharia law in "predominantly Muslim" areas of Britain.
Islamic law is used in large parts of the Middle East, including Iran and Saudi Arabia, and is enforced by religious police. Special courts can hand down harsh punishments which can include stoning and amputation. Forty per cent of the British Muslims surveyed said they backed introducing sharia in parts of Britain, while 41 per cent opposed it. Twenty per cent felt sympathy with the July 7 bombers' motives, and 75 per cent did not. One per cent felt the attacks were "right". Nearly two thirds thought the video images shown last week of British troops beating Iraqi youths were symptomatic of a wider problem in Iraq. Half did not think the soldiers would be "appropriately punished". Half of the 500 people surveyed said relations between white Britons and Muslims were getting worse. Only just over half thought the conviction of the cleric Abu Hamza for incitement to murder and race hatred was fair. Mr Khan, the MP for Tooting, said: "We must redouble our efforts to bring Muslims on board with the mainstream community. For all the efforts made since last July, things do not have appear to have got better." He agreed with Sir Iqbal that the poll showed Muslims still had a "big gripe" about foreign policy, particularly over the war on terror and Iraq. David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said: "It shows we have a long way to go to win the battle of ideas within some parts of the Muslim community and why it is absolutely vital that we reinforce the voice of moderate Islam wherever possible." A spokesman for Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, said: "It is critically important to ensure that Muslims, and all faiths, feel part of modern British society. Today's survey indicates we still have a long way to go… [but] we are committed to working with all faiths to ensure we achieve that end."
No, Only a tribunal that respects fundamental rights is a tribunal that is suitable for our 21 century, all the rest is innapropriate, here in Canade we have a wonderfull system. for some that think the death penalty I wou;d sugest reading ''Dernier jour d'un con****é'' from Victor Hugo, this book has toutche dme personnaly.
No, Only a tribunal that respects fundamental rights is a tribunal that is suitable for our 21 century, all the rest is innapropriate, here in Canade we have a wonderfull system. for some that think the death penalty I wou;d sugest reading ''Dernier jour d'un con****é'' from Victor Hugo, this book has toutche dme personnaly.
I think you may be referring to this which is used in his book Le Misérables
A scaffold, when it is erected and preparedly has Indeed a profoundly disturbing effect. We may remain more or less open-minded on the subject of the death penalty, indisposed to commit ourselves, so long as we have not seen a guillotine with our own eyes.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Re: Sharia law - do you really want it?
akhee doorster
Re: Sharia law - do you really want it?
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks