Das Reich, this forum has given us the ability to put forth differing views and come to a point that we can disagree over something and walk away unharmed and with no consequence.
What about in the world of Shariah - what level of disagreement is tolerated there?
here all of us [including myself] engage in all talk no action.....so stakes are low ....hence consequences are minimal
in an ideal world a majlis or shura will be a forum for debate for the way rules are implemented
but some rules are divinely ordained in Quran and sunnah and many of them can be agreed on by all muslims with minor variations like death penalty for insulting the prophet ] they will have to be enforced without question ...since Islam is afterall a dictatorship of God.
democracies have put to death people for treason or in "legtimate wars" or as collateral damage, such action rarely raises eyebrows anywhere ...i dont see how this is more humane.
THe biggest question is whose Sharia is going to be used to determine who is muslim and who is not. Deobandis, Bralvis, Shias, Ahle Hadees consider each other non-muslims. Al of them except one is going to have to suffer.
these people are only the fringe elements and their opinions are based on certain weak narrations in their books , majority scholar consider each other muslims as long as they believe in one God, last day, Quran,last prophet.
Israr ahmed is right to a certain extent ...in a islamic state the citizenship is your religion so how can a noncitizen be appointed to a high military or official post? ...it makes perfect sense.
In e.g Britain no one will question why isnt a russian nonbritish citizen ] immigrant not appointed the first sea lord...so why is it so hard for people to swallow that a nonmuslim is like a noncitizen in a islamic state?
Why is it so hard to comprehend that a bunch of social laws from a different kind of civilization (barbaric, medieval) 1400 years ago, interpreted by controversial mullahs, just don't make sense in todays world? Why do we have to get sentimental about it because it may belittle our religion? Why do we try to come up with explanations trying to justify atrocious rules and regulations that simply cannot govern a modern country? Just because of our blind faith that it is indeed Allah's true word?
Khanbabax, most rapes don't occur in the middle of public, so getting 4 witnesses would be difficult. Given that, your publication reference asks for undeniable reason to believe the victim for the rapist to get the tazeri punishment, what recourse does a woman have under these "Islamic laws" if she has been raped, and only she and her rapist know it?
?
I'm sorry.. public executions, inhumane treatment of women, banning of music/shaving and harsh punishments to anyone that dare express concerns against the government.... is barbaric to me.
Fortunately, I don't live in Pakistan, I live in a liberal country that offers all kinds of freedom and future prospects.
in that case i cant wait to see what shariat you will come up with.
i dont believe in a strict law system, it should be adaptable.. i very much like the current system in democracies.. congressional debates.. public policies.. rotating governments.. new laws according to need.. no rigidity...
I find it slightly annoying that only Das Reich has had the nerve to answer my questions. If you post your comments here, please try to answer these questions. Thanks.
you forgot to mention QADIYANIES (though they are not considered even muslims) but since the clip is from a qadiyani source, I was wondering why did you leave out that?
We have shariah light these days in pakistan with the suicide bombings. I wonder what blessings full taliban sharia will bring pakistan?
i dont think pcg is inquiring about taliban version of shariah, she is asking about our version of it.what is your information about shariah law or your desire to have it implemented?