Who Qualifies
The person applying for Saudi citizenship should fulfill the following conditions:
• Should be an adult who has spent not less than 10 years continuously in the Kingdom.
• Should be mentally and physically fit.
• Should be a professional required by the country.
• Should be proficient in speaking, reading and writing Arabic
• Should not have been sentenced to more than six months in jail for any crime related to morality.
You are probably refering to this](http://63.175.194.25/index.php?ln=eng&ds=qa&lv=browse&QR=47736&dgn=4). The boundaries of ‘arabian peninsula’ are a subject of some debate. Mekkah and Medinah, I can understand. But when the government of Saudi Arabia themselves encourage foreigners to come and work in the Kingdom to help the royals gather more (oil) wealth, then they are themselves violating the essence of the ahadeeth, that you are using to support the argument that these people should not be awarded citizenship rights.
It just seems very awkward to me. Muslims the world over are lining up outside embassies and consulates of these kaafir countries (US, UK, Europe, Australia) to come here and then become a citizen, while we encourage our muslim countries to not award any citizenship rights to non-muslims. If US and UK start refusing citizenship rights based on religious beliefs, what will you say. More importantly what will you say to all those millions of muslims who are presently awarded equal citizenship rights in these countries. We should not dish out what we can’t take back in ourselves.
It just seems very awkward to me. Muslims the world over are lining up outside embassies and consulates of these kaafir countries (US, UK, Europe, Australia) to come here and then become a citizen, while we encourage our muslim countries to not award any citizenship rights to non-muslims. .
[/QUOTE]
the answer that I have read coming from 2 dozen different people over 6 yr period is that it is the fault of Western countries that they allow us to enter....they are following their laws. But we can't have same thing in muslim countries because our religion does not allow this.
so basic conclusion some people have come up in the west based on above attitude and are afraid to say it openly is....west will be punished for being tolerant and accomodating to Islam(and many other groups also).
no one is denying them basic human rights man. any how, non muslims can live and get nationality of all other muslim lands, but just leave the peninsula. they can come as diplomats, traders, but dont raise families there. dont bring their churches or pagodas in the land of two holy places. thats all. it might be little "biased" but comon, thats religion, you have to believe that you are right and others are not, so we are right and that is why the laws are biased towards us. but no one is saying again that they cant come as diplomats, ambassadors, traders and all. and western nations practice secular laws, and they cant ban any one on the basis of religion, otherwise they will voilate their foundation, so they have to admit ppl of all religion. but if america was to one day declare itself christian nation then it can send all muslims packing, but as long as it claims to be secular, it better not be biased. while saudia never claims to be secular, it is islamic country so that does not apply to it.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ThandyMazaq: *
but as long as it claims to be secular, it better not be biased. while saudia never claims to be secular, it is islamic country so that does not apply to it.
[/QUOTE]
As long as Islam claims to be tolerant and righteous, it should not be biased. You can't hold a country to fair (secular) laws while allowing religous states to restrict freedoms you demand in those secular countries. You can't have it both ways.
Imagine no longer, Faisal. It reads as elitist, arrogant, sanctimonuous, bigoted, small-minded and hypocritical.
god u lot just wanna cry even when there is no need to get ure knickers in a knot..
the citizenship thingy is available for all.. from christian firangees to hindu desis.. religion hasnt been made a requirement…
most ppl i have talked to couldnt care less bout it now.. maybe 10 -15 yrs ago ppl woulda jumped at the chance.. only sadists would want a saudi citizenship now.. teh chance to be tortured at airports (especially in the west)..
i think the only ppl who will really benefit from this new law are teh saudi women who couldnt get their expat husbands saudified cuz the law wouldnt allow it.. and since the kids follow the father’s nationality.. they couldnt attend public schools, free checkups at the govt hospitals etc…
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Seminole: *
As long as Islam claims to be tolerant and righteous, it should not be biased. You can't hold a country to fair (secular) laws while allowing religous states to restrict freedoms you demand in those secular countries. You can't have it both ways.
Imagine no longer, Faisal. It reads as elitist, arrogant, sanctimonuous, bigoted, small-minded and hypocritical.
[/QUOTE]
i m not demanding any freedoms from secular states, if they decide to deport all muslims tomorrow, i wont sign petitions, i will just pack my bags. why do you want to come to saudia any ways? i dont get the fuss man. muslims have makkah and madina, otherwise it is a dry hot piece of land and ppl would be better living outside of it. i dont know what religion you believe in but i think you wouldnt want ppl of other religion to come to your holiest shrine either. its just normal.
No. I already said Mekkah and Medinah, I can understand, and I would agree, just as jews and christians may have some of their holiest places and they only allow followers of their faith in there. Thats fine.
However, the way you worded your response, it totally smacked of double-standards.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *
No. I already said Mekkah and Medinah, I can understand, and I would agree, just as jews and christians may have some of their holiest places and they only allow followers of their faith in there. Thats fine.
However, the way you worded your response, it totally smacked of double-standards.
[/QUOTE]
since i got it out of your mouth, let me state my argument. so you want 'citizenships' for non mulims but somehow those citizens are not allowed to enter two giant big cities in the country. imagine you having a ban on entry of new york and washington dc for no other reason but your religion. can you consider yourself a true citizen of america then? you cant man. you will feel like a secondclass citizen cuz u r denied a right to enter two cities in your nation for your religion. so if kafirs are given citizenship of saudia, they will still not be allowed in makkah and madina. hmm...so is that not intolerant? its same actually. either you give some one full citizenship rights or you dont. second class citizenship is wrong in my view. because second class citizen will be more depressed than non citizen. atleast the non citizen will have another country he could call his own and go there and not feel ANY restrictions. but a second class citizen might not have any other citizenship so he has no where to go to really 'belong'.
since i got it out of your mouth, let me state my argument. so you want 'citizenships' for non mulims but somehow those citizens are not allowed to enter two giant big cities in the country. imagine you having a ban on entry of new york and washington dc for no other reason but your religion. can you consider yourself a true citizen of america then? you cant man. you will feel like a secondclass citizen cuz u r denied a right to enter two cities in your nation for your religion. so if kafirs are given citizenship of saudia, they will still not be allowed in makkah and madina. hmm...so is that not intolerant? its same actually. either you give some one full citizenship rights or you dont. second class citizenship is wrong in my view. because second class citizen will be more depressed than non citizen. atleast the non citizen will have another country he could call his own and go there and not feel ANY restrictions. but a second class citizen might not have any other citizenship so he has no where to go to really 'belong'.
[/QUOTE]
