[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Matsui: *
Yes, I do look it from a concept of equality, more so, equal opportunities. This has nothing to do with the role of a woman or a man. Requirement to be a leader has nothing to do with whether they can bear children or not. There are many men who raise children, are you saying they are unfit to be a khalifah because of that? Aside from a simple discriminatory 7th century male dominated viewpoint, your argument doesn't hold practical credence, only a faith based one. What about women who can;t have children or women who don;t want children, if they are sane, free, capable..etc they should be allowed to stand for leadership, if they want.
What the hell are you talking about? And what does this have to do with women being a khalifah? The concept of male reproduction is not a western phenomenon alone. Many religions spanning humanities existence cater to the idea of creation through a male form. The androgny of male/female reproduction has roots in egypt, India, Near east, and the Americas. From a philosophical point of view the leap to science is not that far fetched.
My statements are not ridiculing islam. Islam is islam, I am ridiculing your thought process. There is a finite understanding as to what is faith and what is sociological influences of a certain time that influence all relgions. Praying 5 times a day is fine, you can believe in god's mandate because it doesn;t infringe upon any ones right. But to extend god's mandate, moreover, to not see the clear influence of a tribal, violent society from a certain time period into practices that are inconsistent and anachronistic is simply blind faith.
The above is a perfect example of why little knowledge is dangerous. DO osme research on rampant homosexuality among the great arab, turkish and persian artistic communities in the middle ages. The term "apprentice", when applied to those who studied the minutiarist form under the great masters of Herat and Istanbul referrred to the way they stroked the Master's pen more than the paint brush. Homosexuality has been around since time immemorial. Religion has been a scourge in suppressing something that they cannot explain.
[/QUOTE]
I never said the reason why women cannot stand for the post of khaleefah is due to thier pregnancies rather this is what you assumed.
Like i said, because your viewpoint towards life is so different to the muslims you will view events differently. An an example, you are secular in your outlook and the way you measure an action is whether there are benefits in that action. So if doing a certain action brings pleasure to you, you will see that action as good and if it brings harm then you will endeavour to abstain from it.
The muslim sees the world from a completly different perspective, his outlook on life is built on the Islamic doctrine (aqeedah) and when he views events and performs actions he does not look for the benefits and harms in that action rather he finds out whether or not that action is allowed in Islam ie is it halaal or haraam.
So let me give you an example, A beautiful women appears in front of you and you find her to be very attractive. In your case, you will see no harm in looking at her rather you will percieve the benefits of looking at her as you hold the concept of freedom.
The muslim will turn his gaze away as Islam commands him to do that.
Why is it that you will gaze and the muslim will not?
Simply because they view life from a completly different perspective. So the way you undermine the views of a person is not by showing the fallacies of the idea but rather the basis they are built upon. This way you undermine the entire structure built upon it.
So by you trying to undermine the condition of the post for head of state, you will achieve nothing. The reason for this is because we muslims adhere to this rule because we rationally believe the Quran to be the definate word of God and we also believe that the Prophethood of Muhammed (saw) can be rationally proven. So anything that stems from this we will accept because we have already rationally proven that the basis is correct.
The belief in one God is rationally proven by sensing man, life and universe and that they are not eternal and hence needed an entity to bring them into existence.
The Quran is rationally proven to be revelation from Allah(swt) as it challenges all of humanity to bring one surah (chapter) like it as if it were from man, then surely another man would be able to produce something better or similar. Until today nobody has broken this challenge.
The Prophet (saw) conveyed the Quran and hence he is appointed by Allah and thus he is rationally proven to be a Prophet as only Prophets convey the messages.
In a nutshell, this is the rational belief of Islam and the reason why we accept all rules from Islam even though we do not know why but what we do know is that this is what Allah (swt) wants us to adhere to.
If there is anything that is blind and shallow, it is secularism. This idea of separating religion from state was not a basis reached through a deep thinking process, rather it was a reaction to the oppression of the church upon its people. And so the philosophers as a reaction came up with the idea of stripping the church of political authority. So the basis of secularism is just a reaction to circumstances of the past.
What a shallow way to see the world.
