Please guys, this issue is sensitive enough without our diverting it into a Hindu-Muslim, India-Pakistan bashing session.
Matsui, Yes everyone is entitled to their ‘ways of lives’ as well. Yaar i have sufficient problems to worry about, i don’t spend my time worrying about other peoples’ religious beliefs and how to convert them. To you yours, to me mine. i’m not the bigoted, “infidel”-hating Muslim you perhaps perceive me as.
i think we are dealing with this in the other thread.
**
Anyone who claims a civilian’s life - whether it be by hijacking civilian planes and flying them into commercial structures, whether it be by uprooting someone’s residences while civilians are still inside, whether it be a trade embargo, whatsoever it is - anyone claiming a civilian’s life is wrong and it can never be justified. Period.
Just a side point, surely the secularists like Matsui do believe in Patriotic Death for a cause? Millions of Secular soldiers would stand up from their trenches and suicidally attack their opponents in World War 1. In World War 2, after Pearl Harbour, US Naval Air Forces launched a surprise air attack on Tokyo, the attack included civilian areas and was a suicide one way mission. Surely those people did not do a wrong? Dieing for a cause? The line is divided between senseless attacks on civilians for no reason and those for a cause which can be justified. I know it is hard for many self preservation obsessed people to accept, that there are those in this World who are willing to die for a cause or for others.
Another point, the biggest anti American rallies were not held in Peshawar, they were in modern developed Karachi.
Nadia that is not the point. I don;t have to read any scripture to know that blowing up people in a pizza parlor is wrong. You mentioned Mcveigh, I gave you a clear example of the degree of difference. To say that a “large” minority of muslims don’t hold Osama in favorable light would be incorrect. One can oly do a search on this BB to get a precentage breakdown. The converse would not be true for McVeigh in America.
Your equating OSama with UN Sanctions in Iraq is deplorable. The sanctions were there because one country decided to flout previous resolutions. No one is to be blamed for the terrorists flying commercial airliners into he WTC. Any moral equivalence you are seeking here is shameful at best.
Your definition of a “personal way of life” seems to be in minority from the “all inclusive” interpretation heard many times over…just read this thread from the start.
Zakk, going back to the intention of this thread and the wanting of a khilafah. As a non muslim and a secularist there are a lot of inconsistencies in the syste, as I have mentioend many times but have rarely gotten answers for.
Say I am living in your khilafah. I have huge issues with paying a religion specific tax for one. Secondly, I work in finance, and I have huge issues with non-interest type econmic system (which will be an utter failure) and other things. Unlike in a western democracy, I or you do not have the authority to change the laws under a khilafah, there is no timely jurisprudence. If god says no homosexuality is allowed. Where would the trouser pilots go? Can they petition god to change the laws? The issue is, god's supposed word cannot be wrong. Otherwise we , more importantly muslims, are living under a paradox, no? So governance becaomes a huge issue. If laws are secular, can be changed. Then it si a system that muslims should look at. Absolutes will not succeed,as evolution in Humanity both in terms of technological and cultural sophistication and evolution demand it. As NYA said above.
You completely dodged my statement regarding civilian loss of life being wrong and unjustifiable. i am not certain how much clearer i could have made it to yourself than:
**
To you yours, to me mine. My ‘way of life’ is not harming anyone (at least not physically). We can surely appreciate each other’s desire to express our religious beliefs how we personally want, as long as neither of us causes any harm or insult to someone else.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Matsui: *
Western Democracy is the best khilafah that you could ever hope for.
[/QUOTE]
agreed. its rather interesting that peopel dont see that democracy embodies the exact spirit that a khliafah would..i.e. peopel chosen by people to serve the population, and to avoid monarchy.
are there issues with democracy, sure there are, its not perfect, but its the best thing going.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Matsui: *
Most of the world can differentiate between culture and religion..
[/QUOTE]
Not quite...santa, christmas tree, satti etc are to name a few aspects of culture that are ingrained with religion even though they are not parts of religion from what I have been told.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Fraudz: *
agreed. its rather interesting that peopel dont see that democracy embodies the exact spirit that a khliafah would..i.e. peopel chosen by people to serve the population, and to avoid monarchy.
[/QUOTE]
Mr. Fraudia that is a wrong perception actually. A khaleefah can not make his own rules he has to implement the rules laid out by Allah since allah clearly says that those who rule by other than what allah has revealed are surely disbelievers.
Hence to say that khilafah is like democracy where people can choose whomsoever, who can implement whatsoever is a wrong perception.
The electing process might be similar (not sure) i.e. the best person is picked by the people. However if this person chooses not to rule by Allah then this wont be a khilafah, he wont be the 'ameer ul momineen', he would just be a ruler who's choosing to go against Allah's rules. Do you see the difference?
(btw, i am in no way a part of any hizb-ut-xxxxxx so i am in no way justifying their approach to khilafah)
[QUOTE] Originally posted by Matsui: *
....If laws are secular, can be changed. Then it si a system that muslims should look at. Absolutes will not succeed,as evolution in Humanity both in terms of technological and cultural sophistication and evolution demand it*. As NYA said above.
[/QUOTE]
No. Human "evolution" does not deman such laws as homosexuality. Homosexuality existed centuries ago. In Islam, it was prohibited, and shall remain so. Yes, it is okay for you to go and design a new traffic light system, design a new flying system, go to that kind of evolution.
I have read Armstrong’ article. This is not fair. After reading such stereotyped themes I am left with one wish, ‘Alas, I could meet Islam.’
I do not think if the writer has actually read quran, or how could she ignore verses written against Jews and Christians.
Ms Nadia, or others when demand the establishment of an Islam State, (as they believe will differ from present Islamic States.) will all kind of hate mongered verses be deleted from quran.
I am sure, not.
So far, in a Sunni Islam a Shia is not safe and vise versa, what to talk about other non-Muslim communities.
Muslims do not support terrorism. I do not think if any community supports terrorism.
If any of verses of Quran are being exploited for wrong doings, and especially when thousand innocents are killed just for nothing…there must be something wrong.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by fantoosh: *
....
I do not think if the writer has actually read quran, or how could she ignore verses written against Jews and Christians.
Ms Nadia, or others when demand the establishment of an Islam State, (as they believe will differ from present Islamic States.) will all kind of hate mongered verses be deleted from quran.
I am sure, not.
[/quote]
"Against" Jews and Christians? When you say that, can you also elaborate on the "context"? Please do share your knowledge about verses "against Jews and Christians".... and yes don't tell me about "kill Jews" verses if you don't know its background/history.
Surely they will not be deleted as they are not written by human being.
[quote]
So far, in a Sunni Islam a Shia is not safe and vise versa, what to talk about other non-Muslim communities.
[/quote]
Just like no community is safe from criminals, so is "Islamic community" unsafe but its because of expensive and selective justice system.
[quote]
If any of verses of Quran are being exploited for wrong doings, and especially when thousand innocents are killed just for nothing…there must be something wrong.
[/QUOTE]
Education rings a bell?
No. Human "evolution" does not deman such laws as homosexuality. Homosexuality existed centuries ago. In Islam, it was prohibited, and shall remain so. Yes, it is okay for you to go and design a new traffic light system, design a new flying system, go to that kind of evolution.
[/QUOTE]
Bhai mere..if it existed since time immemorial than either god is smoking something for creating it or the laws are man made that prohibit it. You tell me which one..khilafah or not.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Matsui: *
Bhai mere..if it existed since time immemorial than either god is smoking something for creating it or the laws are man made that prohibit it. You tell me which one..khilafah or not.
[/QUOTE]
God is not, you sure are smoking! Khilafah or no Khilafah, no problem, as long as constitution/ruler follows Islam, justice is served to everyone equally, rules followed/implemented for EVERYONE then whatever you call it.
yaar it is not. specially under the khilafah or in texas. Homosexuals are created by god. If not..then there is no guarantee that heteros are created by god either.
Fantoosh, i thought it was only Muslims who were supposed to be bigoted and xenophobic? i am sorry, but which hate quotes from the Quran are you referring to in this particular post of yours. Please do share them with me and provide the proper contextual notes for each of the verses as well. i would be deeply grateful.
Let there be no compulsion in religion {2.256}
Bear witness to the truth in all equity and never let hatred of others lead you to deviate from Justice. Be just for this is closest to righteousness. Remember God is well aware of all that you do {5.8} [My emphasis in bold]
And tell my servants that they should speak in a most kindly manner (unto those who do not share their beliefs) {17.53}
Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loveth those who are just {60.8} [My emphasis in bold]
Oh, Mankind! We created you from a single soul, male and female, and made you into nations and tribes, so that you may come to know one another (not to despise each other). Truly, the most honored of you in God’s sight is the one who is most righteous {49.13}
When people refer of the "glory days" of Islams empire, I seriouly think the deluded. The only reason that we consider that as the golden age, is because at the time, Europe was living in the Dark ages. The Golden age is seen thus, in refrence to Europe. As soon as Europe came out of its dark age, it quickly surrpased the Islamic world. In fact, they got so far ahead, that Muslims have yet to catch up. The reason was, that the Europeans could think outside the box.. Muslim society couldnt do that then, neither can they do that now. To progress, we have to totally change the Islamic society in general.. We have to start thinking outside the box. My oppinion, the Muslim countries HAVE to be more pragmatic And we, have to redefine Islams relation with the state.
Please guys, this issue is sensitive enough without our diverting it into a Hindu-Muslim, India-Pakistan bashing session.