Re: What is your argument against secularism?
**I did not find any satisfactory answer **to any of these in your previous posts. Kindly provide the link to the post.
Well, neither did anybody else apparently but that's my stance on this issue. We are going in circles.
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
If there is a case of rape it should be punished by the state severely. Similarly if someone is found drunk driving or caught creating a nuisance after drinking in public should be prosecuted by the state...
You helped me so well here Yazdi. If adultery and extra marital sex were a crime to begin with, there would be no victims pf rape (or very less victims of rape). If drinking was a crime, we wont see someone getting hit and killed by a drunk driver. You wont find people getting killed because of drunk driving in Saudi Arabia, and the reason is obvious.
First, please decide whether children can be made good Muslims if you raise them right or whether the state has to be involved. If you believe in the latter, then you are implying that no one raised in the West can be a good Muslim.
Social values play a major role in how well a kid could be raised. Social values do not come out of morality because standards of morality change over the period of time (100 years ago, a guy and a gal living with each other, even in USA was something not very well taken and considered immoral), instead social values evolve out of law of the state (and proper implementation of that law).
Yes a good muslim wont drink alchohal, but can his generations remain a good Muslim in a society like Holland for instance where drugs and prostitution are legal?
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
^@ TLK- That's a valid argument from a religious standpoint! You fear change. It is for this fear you cannot bring yourself to accept the idea of having a secular government.
But Like I said earlier, I cann't sacrifice justice for the sake of morality.
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
Not so quick my friend; the Quran doesn't mention stoning anywhere. Now what do you say?
I am glad this made you go back and read what I wrote :)
You are correct. There is no verse on stoning in Quran. So you were reading! :)
Similarly, there is no verse on how many Ruku, Sajood, rakaat are there in Salah. So, it means we should do it as we please? Obvisouly No.
The ruling on Stoning (or Rajm in Arabic) was actually revealed but was not made part of Quran by the Prophet (saw) in a narration by Umer (ra). This is same as hadith Qudsi which were also sent down but not made part of Quranic text.
The practice of stoning was carried by the prophet (saw) as is recorded in the history and so was by his companions.
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
! You fear change. It is for this fear you cannot bring yourself to accept the idea of having a secular government. .
replace the word 'secular' with 'religious' in your comment and I can say exactly the same thing to you.
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
Social values play a major role in how well a kid could be raised. Social values do not come out of morality because standards of morality change over the period of time (100 years ago, a guy and a gal living with each other, even in USA was something not very well taken and considered immoral), instead social values evolve out of law of the state (and proper implementation of that law).
Don't try to dodge the question man, can there be no good Muslims in the West or in secular Muslim societies?
[QUOTE]
Yes a good muslim wont drink alchohal, but can his generations remain a good Muslim in a society like Holland for instance where drugs and** prostitution are legal?**
[/QUOTE]
Have you lived in Lahore?
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
The ruling on Stoning (or Rajm in Arabic) was actually revealed but was not made part of Quran by the Prophet (saw) in a narration by Umer (ra). This is same as hadith Qudsi which were also sent down but not made part of Quranic text.
If you google it, you will find that there is much controversy over the stoning issue among Muslim scholars.
I stand by it that it is not mentioned in Quran and therefore not an Islamic law. You just can't make up things and say they were revealed, but not made a part of the Quran. Were you there at the time?
[QUOTE]
The practice of stoning was carried by the prophet (saw) as is recorded in the history and so was by his companions.
[/QUOTE]
Please provide example. Sorry, but I can't take this at face value.
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
If you google it, you will find that there is much controversy over the stoning issue among Muslim scholars.
Can you also google to see the timeline when the this actually became controversy of this proportion?
[quote]
I stand by it that it is not mentioned in Quran and therefore not an Islamic law. You just can't make up things and say they were revealed, but not made a part of the Quran. Were you there at the time?
[/quote]
This is the reason, I mentioned about Salah. By the same token, since donkey is not forbidden in Quran, will you eat it?
[quote]
Please provide example. Sorry, but I can't take this at face value.
[/quote]
I am willing to provide examples from the life of the prophet (saw) but thing is that all recorded events of his life are known as hadeeth. Question is if you are willing to accept those or you just want to reject it altogether. If you are only going to reject any hadith then, I do not think we will gain anything here. I do not want to waste my and your time in collecting all related ahadith only for you to deny their authenticity.
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
I am willing to provide examples from the life of the prophet (saw) but thing is that all recorded events of his life are known as hadeeth. Question is if you are willing to accept those or you just want to reject it altogether. If you are only going to reject any hadith then, I do not think we will gain anything here. I do not want to waste my and your time in collecting all related ahadith only for you to deny their authenticity.
If you seek to prove Muslims to be barbarians, then so be it. Or do you honestly believe the stoning in not barbaric? Lets just agree to disagree because I refuse to believe that Islam would condone a punishment as cruel as stoning when it goes against everything that Islam stands for.
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
If you seek to prove Muslims to be barbarians, then so be it. Or do you honestly believe the stoning in not barbaric? Lets just agree to disagree because I refuse to believe that Islam would condone a punishment as cruel as stoning when it goes against everything that Islam stands for.
connecting only Muslims with stoning is such a propaganda. Stoning to death is punishment also suggested, both in Bible and Torah. I even quoted the bible in some other thread.
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
connecting only Muslims with stoning is such a propaganda. Stoning to death is punishment also suggested, both in Bible and Torah. I even quoted the bible in some other thread.
Thank You for proving my point TLK. If you would care to re-read my earlier posts, you will find that I already said: *Stoning is much older than Islam. *
Now, that doesn't make stoning right, does it?
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
Now, that doesn't make stoning right, does it?
stoning, beheading and all such ways of executions were formed, because of the lack of tools like lethal injection of guns. A religious govt can do ijemah and come up with another form of punishment.
another thing is ...
I think, and I might be wrong, that because adultery is considered a crime against society, its the society that needs to take part in execution, hence this collective method of punishment.
also, someone asked this question to Mufti Mehmood (a great scholar and father of Fazlur Rehman) and he said that in reality, stoning (because its a slow death) gives the accused a chance, to deny the charges in the middle of the punishment, and its the responsibility of Qazi to halt the stoning right away (keep in mind that in Prophet's days, most of the stoning took place out of self-confessions of the adulterer). An instant way of killing the accused would not give him/her that chance.
qu
Thank You for proving my point TLK. If you would care to re-read my earlier posts, you will find that I already said: *Stoning is much older than Islam. *
Now, that doesn't make stoning right, does it?
Glad to see you agree that Stoning was also prescribed it Gospel and Torah.
Now it's easy to see why it will be part of Islam as well. Some points that may make things easy to relate and corelate:
1) Islam did not start with the coming of the last prophet (saw). It is the same religion that was given to Adam, Nuh, Ibraheem, Musa, Isa (as). Even Quran categorically calls Ibraheem (as) as Muslim; not jewish, not christian. Name such as Judaism or Christianity are not the name of the actual religion. They are named after Personalities (Juda, Christ).
2) Islamic Scripture is the same continuation of the message that was given to previous prophets (as), hence, they and their stories are mentioned in Quran.
3) Quran testifies that there is light and guidance in Torah and Gospel (except that it also mentions that Jews and Christians have made ammendments in the scripture and truth is mixed with lies).
This only means that stoning punishment was given in the previous messages of God too.
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
replace the word 'secular' with 'religious' in your comment and I can say exactly the same thing to you.
Then you must know what is it that I fear? God? Injustice?
Please elaborate.
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
So you are saying that people's Imans are so weak that they have to be kept in place through shariah laws? If that is the case, then people should stop pretending to be Muslims.
Are you implying that Imans of early Muslims ( whom we call shabis ) were so weak that we badly needed these laws implemented in first Muslim state ?
^@Naabigh - No, they were more concerned about the spread of Islam and to make sure it stayed that way they made amendments to the existing law to show off they are the boss now. It's been a customary thing all throughout history for conquerers. When the British occupied the Subcontinent, they implemented their own laws and called it the British Raj. When they occupied the first colonies in America, they implemented their own laws. It has nothing to do with religion. It's more imperialism than anything
This answers the question perfectly.
First she jumped the gun without reading the chain of our conversation and now you are just doing the same :) Anyway I have posted the chain - Sawal Gandum , jawab chaNNa :)
btw did you really read what she wrote ? She stated that Shaa'bis and Khulfa-e-rashdeen ( companions and successors of Hazrat Muhammad PBUH) were so power hungry that they have amendments the existed laws to show their supremacy ..
In other words - Islam laws were made by some Megalomaniac people as per their own will and wish :)
Well that's a quite big allegation , my mate :)
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
Then you must know what is it that I fear? God? Injustice?
Please elaborate.
Haha, putting the word God and Injustice in the same sentence .. I expected a more subtle attack on religion from you, Theorist. Dil totay totay kerditta
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
psyah, Aren't there some pre-requisites for this maximum punishment, such as, state is truly unable to provide job/food to its people?
I also remember reading the value of the stolen item and the age of the criminal is also considered.
Peace Jinx
I was talking about the maximum punishment for theft - that would be for the most shameless form of theft - i.e. violently armed, blatant disregard of unrest taking huge amounts and when the was no need in the person other than greed ... for this extreme situation the punishment will not exceed chopping off the hand ... this was my question. So yes ... to your question.
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
stoning, beheading and all such ways of executions were formed, because of the lack of tools like lethal injection of guns. A religious govt can do ijemah and come up with another form of punishment.
another thing is ...
I think, and I might be wrong, that because adultery is considered a crime against society, its the society that needs to take part in execution, hence this collective method of punishment.
also, someone asked this question to Mufti Mehmood (a great scholar and father of Fazlur Rehman) and he said that in reality,** stoning (because its a slow death) gives the accused a chance, to deny the charges in the middle of the punishment, and its the responsibility of Qazi to halt the stoning right away (keep in mind that in Prophet's days, most of the stoning took place out of self-confessions of the adulterer). An instant way of killing the accused would not give him/her that chance**.
Heh, not true. Explain to me then why women are to burried up to their chest while men are to be burried only upto their waist. Besides, a person's face is usually covered and hands are tied. How the hell would you know he is repenting for his sins while being stoned?
God, please if you exist, end this B.S.!
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
Haha, putting the word God and Injustice in the same sentence .. I expected a more subtle attack on religion from you, Theorist. Dil totay totay kerditta
Nice try! :p
Re: What is your argument against secularism?
God, please if you exist, end this B.S.!
Urgh c'mon we dont want you to get strike by lightning :)