Actually the question of leaving the faith is very simple. You are allowed to leave Islam but as I said before you should be ready to deal with the consequences, which are manifold not limited to death.
Sadly my dear there is no crime for following the laws of the land. You should know this very well. After all slave owners still live freely to this day in the west.
Also you are taking a very Islamic (ie collective) view of the situation. You stated yourself the actions of an individual in the case of adultery is between him/her and the family. So that does not include you. So by your own words you should mind your own business.
What a bizarre string of posts. In a thread about the Dutch following their own laws, culture and norms by allowing free speech, you are telling people they must obey the law of the land. Well, guess what? Freedom of speech is the law of the land in the Netherlands, so I guess you are saying Muslims should mind their own DAMNED business. You have no right to poke ur nose into other ppl's business. Their laws doesn't affect you. If you don't like to hear what people are saying about you, your religion or your prophet, don't listen. But don't complain either. Either take your own advice or be a hypocrite.
Also you are taking a very Islamic (ie collective) view of the situation. You stated yourself the actions of an individual in the case of adultery is between him/her and the family. So that does not include you. So by your own words you should mind your own business.
Totally illogical and/or intellectually dishonest view. Being against an oppressive and intrusive government is the duty and right of indiviuduals to rail againsts. If everyone minded their own business then government would be free be involved as much as they pleased with individual lives, wouldn't they?
As always you never read but speak. Nor do you think, but I don't expect anything less.
Lets start off slowly for you. I completely agree that people should get involved in things they don't believe in. That is after all why I applauded when a US company took down the website for this movie as it violated US laws on racism and hate-speech. Secondly the Dutch have rules against Hate speech. That is after all why you have dutch nationals calling for this mans resignation and worse. I completely agree with the dutch laws that ban hate speech, which are part of the holocaust laws.
On the other hand "ummm" believes we have no right to get involved. I personally think we have every right to get involved.
I will quote her post:
[quote]
What's wrong or not is not ur business either Mr.CM. If someone has an extramarital affairs, it's their and their spouses' business. None of your or your religion's DAMNED business. You have no right to poke ur nose into other ppl's business. Extramarital affairs doesn't affect you. They affect the person's immediate family and its their business to settle the issues
[/quote]
[quote]
Being against anoppressive and intrusive government is the duty and right of indiviuduals to rail againsts.
[/quote]
How ironic. Why don't you rally against those who used Biochemical weapons in Vietnam? How about the ones that used Nuclear Weapons in Japan? How the men that raped thousands of women in Cambodia, Vietnam and Japan? Oh I forgot. Those are war heros.
"Theirs not to make reply,
Theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to do and die,"
In other words, Yes. These are our customs and laws. If Islamic law states that someone should be stoned/hanged/beheaded for adultery, by all means it should be implemented. Simply because you don't agree with them, doesn't make them wrong.
That's a bit bizarre and reinforces the primitive islam theory.
Surely you are not defending these practices even while admitting their violative nature?
As always you never read but speak. Nor do you think, but I don't expect anything less.
Please stop with the condescending posts. You highly overestimate your intelligence and wit. It's nice to see some things in life don't change.
If you are so keen on banning hate speech, then why don't you address the core issue... MUSLIMS using the Quran and hadith to propagate violence. Dear God, they are using YOUR holy book as motive to kill and maim innocent people and all you care about is that someone is making the connection and making it public. But oh, that's right. You advocate the execution of people who leave a religion or who decide for themselves who they are going to have sex with. It almost makes me want to make a make about it.
Remember, Muslims are free to allow extremists to use their religion for evil purposes as long as they are willing to live with the consequences. Cause and effect the very foundation our lives revolve around.
"Theirs not to make reply,
Theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to do and die,"
In other words, Yes. These are our customs and laws. If Islamic law states that someone should be stoned/hanged/beheaded for adultery, by all means it should be implemented. Simply because you don't agree with them, doesn't make them wrong.
Any government or law that states adultery shall be punishable by death are archaic, barbaric, and should be purged from any society that wants to move forward. Laws and customs are not inherently right nor just. As society's move forward, become more educated, and gain sophistication they adjust. Examples of such are gains we have see in civil rights, women's rights, and human rights. Accepting laws that which suppress these rights only retards a society and destines it for failure.
Would you apply this logic towards things like murder and rape? Are laws regarding such matters inherently right or just? What determines that?
Malum in se vs Malum prohibitum.
CM's argument for punishment of death for committing adultery is based on the concept of Malum prohibitum, ie: the state says it's wrong so it is wrong, and he believes a death is just because the state says so.
Now Malum in se is the concept that something is wrong even without a law stating it, it's naturally evil and society on a whole see it as such ie: rape and murder.
So above are the legal differences of the two but what you're asking seems to be going towards more of a philosophical question. Are humans hard wired to know right from wrong to some extent or is it all learned and thus subjective? I'm not sure.
"Theirs not to make reply,
Theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to do and die,"
In other words, Yes. These are our customs and laws. If Islamic law states that someone should be stoned/hanged/beheaded for adultery, by all means it should be implemented. Simply because you don't agree with them, doesn't make them wrong.
That might have been ok in the 6th or 7th centuries but not anymore. No civilized nation will allow such arbitrary and disproportionate punishments.
Since anybody can start a religion, if religious law is to be implemented as a nation's law, you will have to limit the nation to one religion. That obviously is not possible and therefore the customs and laws you are talking about are by definition outdated.
*utd: * Adultery is not really malum prohibitum for those who believe in the punishment for it, it is evil and most of society does see it that way.
you are right, I am making the latter point. What makes rape and murder naturally evil for you is your value system, but you may be willing to view "taking of a human life violently" positively under certain circumstances. Likewise there exist cultures (albeit primitive) where murder and rape arent necessarily evil. Take harvest queens for example, their murders were celebrated, and as we see in Africa raping an enemy's women can be seen positively. Take incest for example, you and I would feel that certain relationships are wrong while they're very natural for others.
So the distinction (for many things, if not all) is subjective, and it is subjective based on our respective value systems. Muslims values are strongly informed by Islam, aside from cultural factors. Does this mean that one person cant judge another person's value system? Sure I find any culture permitting rape and murder abhorrent, but its a logical leap to say that a difference in value systems necessarily destines it for failure or retardation.
Actually the question of leaving the faith is very simple. You are allowed to leave Islam but as I said before you should be ready to deal with the consequences, which are manifold not limited to death.
Sadly my dear there is no crime for following the laws of the land. You should know this very well. After all slave owners still live freely to this day in the west.
Also you are taking a very Islamic (ie collective) view of the situation. You stated yourself the actions of an individual in the case of adultery is between him/her and the family. So that does not include you. So by your own words you should mind your own business.
Oh! How very tolerant of you. The North Koreans shud learn a lesson from you and tell the rest of the world that anyone can oppose their policies, but they have face the consequences. LOL
[quote]
On the other hand "ummm" believes we have no right to get involved. I personally think we have every right to get involved.
[/quote]
Read my posts again. i was referring to you justifying stonings and beheadings. Anyway, Greet Wilders didn't need to make this film. All he needed to do was ask ppl to go to Islamic forums and see ppl defending stonings/beheadings for dishonesty towards their husbands. He could have made his point much more strongly.
Aww they are all crawling out of the woodwork. uberalles You are ready to condemn the Muslim countries. How about the 23 other Christian countries? No condemnation for them? Nor the Christian groups and church groups that work in these countries and can't stop FGM? I would like to see an equal condemnation for groups in the US and Europe that work in Africa but don't put a stop to this practice. Nor in Latin America for that matter.
Tariq Akhtar what does nature have to do with it? I don't see any correlation between Shariah and the nature.
Seminole, the insults will stop once you actually stop posting drivel. Like your previous post. While our dear ummm says we have no right to get involved in such cases, which I strongly disagree with you get on my case for points he made. That is utterly retarded is it not?
Now on to the major point you say. Do Muslims condemn these extremists that hurt innocent people? Absolutely. The UAE has troops in Afghanistan (breaking news yesterday on BBC) fighting the Taliban. Pakistan is fighting its own people, people who gave their lives in our previous wars to get us independence. Yet you lot defend hate speech in the form of this movie.
Its very simple. Let use this forum as an example. No Muslim here defends the killing of innocent people or hate speech used by the extremist.
Let you all defend this Dutch man and his hate speech. You call it freedom of speech. By that same token Extremists according to your logic should be allowed to use freedom of speech to spread hate. Why the double standard? Oh wait. I forgot, we aren't white.
UTD out of all who post here I actually do like you. For one you actually post sensible stuff even if I do not agree with it. For whatever that is worth. Now you use words like Archaic and barbaric which are purely subjective. Put it this way would you consider it archaic and barbaric not to allow people to practice their religion freely and peacefully? There is a point to this relating directly with US and EU laws.
On the whole latin phrase and what not. The reason Murder and Rape are Malum in se, is simple because religion says it is. After all Thou Shall not kill is one of the 10 commandments. Its surprising how many modern laws are based off religious decrees.
Umm atleast the North Koreans listen to you and mind their own business. So when do you plan on doing the same?
In a thread about the Dutch following their own laws, culture and norms by allowing free speech, you are telling people they must obey the law of the land. Well, guess what? Freedom of speech is the law of the land in the Netherlands, so I guess you are saying Muslims should mind their own DAMNED business. You have no right to poke ur nose into other ppl's business. Their laws doesn't affect you. If you don't like to hear what people are saying about you, your religion or your prophet, don't listen. But don't complain either. Either take your own advice or be a hypocrite.
What the hell? Let me get this straight...in your twisted world view, "freedom of speech" includes the right to offend and insult people's beliefs (which, I agree, it does), but it stops short of covering people's right to protest when they feel they are being slighted? This filmmaker should be free to put out whatever filth he wants about Islam, but Muslims should have no freedom to voice their opinions on the matter? Brilliant. Just out of curiosity, did you also tell the Indian Hindus who protested against MF Hussain's nude painting of Saraswati to stop complaining and mind their own damned business?
The muslims in Spain had only two choice- christianity or Death. No matter how intolerant or tolerant Islam was, it could never have survived the Reconquista.
This is true. However, most scholars of the era still believe that most of Spain's population never converted to Islam. In fact, with the exception of a few brief periods (such as the shortlived Almohad Dynasty), Moorish Spain was actually known for its tolerance towards other religions...Jews especially enjoyed a 'golden era,' and were treated far better in Moorish Spain than they were anywhere else in Europe. In fact, when the Jews were driven out during the Reconquista, many of them headed to Muslim-ruled North Africa and the Ottoman Empire...
Quran doesn't allow muslims to leave islam, as everyone knows.
The Quran never specifies any physical punishment for leaving Islam. Period.
There are a handful of hadith that do, and their exact intent is open to interpretation. Many scholars believe that those hadith were issued at a time when the nascent Muslim community of Medina was weak, and apostates were like traitors to the 'state.' They point out that even after making that statement, the Prophet himself signed treaties that allowed people who left Islam to return to their original communities and stay. Other scholars (Javed Ghamidi among them) believe that command only applied to people who left Islam after learning about it from the Prophet himself, and is no longer relevant today. So its hardly as if the matter is as cut and dry as you claim.
And as for the e-Mujtahids discussing the punishment for adultery...if any of you ever bothered to actually pick up a book, you would find that the only circumstances under which adultery can be punished like that is if 4 reliable, adults come forward and swear that they witnessed the act of penetration itself in intimate detail (as plainly as one sees 'a stick entering a kohl container' as many books of jurisprudence put it). Under those standards, its virtually impossible to prove...and I think it was made that way for a reason.
No see that is against the laws of the state like I said earlier. You don't break the law. Well in the case of Europe you do and call it freedom of speech.
CM, first of all, please study the concept of Freedom of Speech before trying to lecture others. It might be easier for people to swallow your brash and condescending t posts if you at least displayed a little knowledge on what you're trying to harangue to others. Freedom of speech IS limited.
And sorry, but by any *modern measurement or standard, executing people for adultery or apostasy **IS barbaric and archaic. Period. End of statement. There is no room for debate amongst educated people on this. I don't care what religion you follow. If whatever version of Islam you are following says it is ok, **UPDATE IT* because it is in obvious and gross error.
Murder and rape are against the law because they are heinous crimes against others, not because they are religious law. The prohibition of coveting thy neighbor's goat is also one of the 10 Commandments, but it is not against the law.