first woman to be jailed for wearing banned Islamic veil

You mentioned a number of points in your post... I could not relate them to our discussion and again there were some I did not understand.

format_quote Originally Posted by M.I.A.

i cant live by a history iv never known.

neither do i think you can move society back hundreds of years.

Allaah (swt) has blessed us with a religion that is applicable to all times and places. The revelation that came over a thousand years ago is as relevant and applicable now as it was then. The Qur'an and the Sunnah teach us how to move forward. Ignoring their teachings is what is causing continuous decline in society.

i can see the benefits of women covering those parts that draw the eyes of men. but its a reflection of the nature of man when they have to go to such extremes.

The primary reason why women cover is because they are commanded to by Allaah (swt). Whether we understand the wisdom behind that is not important.

but making a religion accessible is probably important.

Accessible how?

as for establishing the authority of the sunnah.

find a country that you think fits islam completely so we can all take lessons from there example. nobody has it 100% correct.

That is true, but we have our example in the life of the Prophet (sallallaahu 'alayhi wasallam) and his Companions, and all those who followed them throughout history.

if you cant make islam work in the west, it wont work anywhere.


look at the jews. they often dress like they are jewish. act like they are jewish and are generally... jewish.

and yet they have very little bad press and according to some, rule the world.


muslims representing islam are pretty much unanimously villains.

And despite the bad press, Islam is still the fastest growing religion. The villains that are highlighted by the media are a minority. Who is to judge that Islam cannot work in the west - is this based on lies and propanganda that is being spread in the media?

format_quote Originally Posted by Pygoscelis

This is a very good point. The hypocracy is what makes me roll my eyes at France as well. Saudi Arabia outright admits to being closed minded and repressive. France claims to be open minded and about freedom. France has more to live up to.

I wouldn't go as far to say that disallowing absolute freedom is repressive - the context here being that women should cover themselves appropriately. No government gives their citizens absolute freedom to do whatever they wish. But in terms of living up to each's idea of a model country, then France is clearly going against its secular standards, not that this is necessarily a better way of life.

format_quote Originally Posted by M.I.A.

so what exactly was the charge against the women?
the fact she wore a burka or covered her face?

if its a case of religious symbols in public then muslim and jewish men that cover there heads will also be effected.

im thinking why there has been no backlash from christians that wear crosses and jews that may or may not be effected.
will churches that display crosses outside them have to take them down?


actually i remember the news reports in part and it seemed to only apply to school children..

i had no idea about french law.. just saying so my previous posts will be put into perspective.

back to googling

In theory the law against religious symbols displayed in public in France applies equally to all religions, not just Islam.

In practice, the legislature and judiciary seem to do all they can to accomodate the practices of every religion except Islam. The law seems only to be enforced against Muslim religious symbols.

well if there is a god that finds us worthy then im sure it will be alright in the end.

all other forms of argument and debate on the subject seem worthless.


..maybe a good defense team is second choice.

and a good to great memory at election time the third choice.


but maybe this is not the best strategy..



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/3619988.stm

edit*

Sikhs argue that their turbans are not religious symbols.

Young Sikh Ranjit, 15, went to the Jean-Rostand school in the Parisian suburb of Villepinte on Thursday morning to get his new timetable, wearing a thin strip of material on his hair rather than his customary turban, AFP news agency reports.


...i found that quiet funny. men are ok in scarfs apparently.


i missed out sikh's being effected but i guess they are probably finding ways to "integrate"?

format_quote Originally Posted by danieldemol

Even members of the Baha'i Faith? That would be awesome When does such a prayer room get introduced into Islamic countries?

Yes, do you have certain times you pray? Where you stop everything to go to the service of God? Does your faith teach you this?

The prayer room in islamic countries was introduced long ago is known as the mosque/ Masajid. You can also pray anywhere as long as it's purely clean, when I say 'anywhere' as in the world, this earth belongs to God allmighty, as long as it's not an unclean place i.e: Washrooms etc.. Usually people stop everything to pray, their stores etc etc.

format_quote Originally Posted by danieldemol

Hi Gareebah,

I'm afraid I must have been replying when you posted. Yes, Baha'is have obligatory prayer, and no, in many Islamic countries we are not allowed to say our prayers in Masjids (or even washrooms).

Oh I see, I thought you meant for muslims, i misunderstood.

I also stated that we do not pray in unclean places such as washrooms.

In the post you first quoted me, I was referring to prayer rooms provided by schools, colleges, work places etc in the west.

If the muslim's do not allow you, you can perhaps pray elsewhere? There are alternatives?

format_quote Originally Posted by danieldemol

Although I support the idea of a prayer room for "all faiths" (your suggestion) being set aside in schools (and I'm happy to devote personal funds to such an excercise if atheists don't wish it to come from tax money), I can't see why you call for such an interfaith prayer room to be introduced in the west for the benefit of Muslims on one hand, yet suggest Baha'is and other non-Muslims living in Islamic countries should find "other alternatives". If other alternatives are suitable for non-Muslims, why aren't they suitable for Muslims? If introducing an interfaith prayer room is suitable for non-Muslims, why isn't it suitable for Muslims? Do not Muslims consider themselves to have an obligation to lead by example?

Kind regards.

I'm not suggesting that alternatives aren't suitable for muslims. If there is no prayer room, one would pray at any clean spot.

If a Bahai, jewish, christian etc etc individual has to pray during class or whenever, I have nothing against this, they have a right to practice their faith. If they wish to enter a mosque, they are free to do, but that is the case with the mosque and not myself. I am not totally sure of the ruling regarding a non-muslim praying in a mosque,however I do know a non-muslims is allowed to enter a mosque, so i'd let someone with knowledge respond to that.

And yes, muslims are supposed to, but we are humans and aren't perfect. But in that sense we have the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) to lead by an example.

Greetings Daniel,

format_quote Originally Posted by danieldemol

That is a fascinating question, and to exhibit such a line of reasoning shows you have excelled a substantial portion of Muslims who do not apply consistently that it is a fundamental human right to protest that which is unjust.

Which substantial portion are these and how do you know they are not applying it consistently?

In order to protest that which is unjust, freedom of speech is required. If the peoples who commit an injustice thought it was injust, they are less likely to have comitted such actions in the first place. Thus it clearly follows that in order for the human right - to protest injustice - to be protected, one has to provide people with the right to protest that which they consider to be unjust even if the majority believes the action coming under protest to be just. In other words, in order to protect this fundamental human right, freedom of speech is essential.

Would you therefore suggest freedom of speech be introduced in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan etc?

'Freedom of speech' can also be used to oppose what is just, and is not always a cause of betterment. But before suggesting such freedom be introduced in other countries, we must first ask ourselves why those countries purporting to already allow such freedom are not even doing what they say.

I'm afraid I must have been replying when you posted. Yes, Baha'is have obligatory prayer, and no, in many Islamic countries we are not allowed to say our prayers in Masjids (or even washrooms).

A Masjid is a place to worship Allaah (swt), and is not the same as a multifaith prayer room which is simply a private area for anybody to come and use. There is no reason why Bahai's need to pray in a Masjid in the same way that Muslims do not go to temples or churches to offer theirs.

Regards.