^^Did you get it?

Oh My! I see we have gone for quantity rather than quality. It is evident that the naysayers are basing their arguments on the basis that the Khalifaat is not achievable in today’s world. This is but an assumption based on assumptions by others whose opinions are treated as superior (the ‘enlightened’ westerners) that we must listen to and be considered ‘progressive’ and ‘modern’. To these guys (CG, ND and JB) it is a mystery as to why we long for Sharia to be applied correctly over all Muslim lands since we are all western bred and should be thankful for secularism as Naden implied. CG You seem a tad confused, I provided you with a link for you to read up on the basics of Sharia and how it should be applied but you then go off on a tangent and talk about voting governments out if it fails its people while at the same ignoring (or are in denial) the fact that Khalifs are voted in themselves and guess what? By the people! So there goes your ‘freedom to elect’ argument. Having said that Labour is yet to be voted out and it looks like they will stay there for a lot longer. Your comments on previous dynasties and how they gained from their rule can easily be equated with a certain Mr Bush junior and a Mr Donald Rumsfeld who were also elected in the way you clearly advocate for. A simplistic argument which deviates away from the core subject being discussed which is that of Sharia Laws Vs Secular Laws (note we are talking about the laws and how they are applied here and not history). But hey I know it’s hard for your not to stay on subject without deliberately falsifying information in the hope of gaining an advantage. Either that or you really need to read up some! Have you read any false statements from me regarding secular laws? Secular Laws allowed for a convicted paedophile to be released early only for him to return to his old stomping grounds, enter a home to talk to an old school friend only for him to snatch her 3 year old daughter when she turned her back. What ensued? Sexual abuse on the 3 year old, a car chase, a manhunt and permanent damage to the little girl’s private parts. What will you do? Vote off the judge who allowed him out or the government? Ahh that’s right, your voice will make no difference and it will happen again tomorrow. Maybe you are prepared to forgive paedophiles after three years in prison, rapists and murderers but we, the ‘backward’ strangers, are not! What about your kid’s inheritance when you become a millionaire? Are you OK with the government taking 40% of it and for your kids to fight over the remainder since you didn’t write a will (or even if you did)? Or would you prefer their inheritance to be without any tax and already apportioned to them avoiding any disputes which may disintegrate your kids when you pass away? Time to man-up and step up a few weight classes my friend. You will need to pack a bit more of a punch. Naden You seem to be only regurgitating what CG says. Your comment on young secular raised people who want a return to the past being a mystery needs expanding. At the moment its just another attempt at ‘I’m more progressive than them because I’ve been ‘told’ secularism is the way forward’ malarkey. You say there is no proof that some of the Khalifs were just but fail to give us anything on whether they were not. What is this? Selective inclination? Again, doesn’t hold much weight. You state a secular government is the best environment for a believer but the same secular governments are doing things contrary to what believers want. Are you going to tell that to Muslim schoolgirls in France/Turkey who cannot practice their faith due to the very same secular laws you are advocating for? What about the Muslim woman divorcees who have to fight in secular courts to get what they should be entitled to when Islam and Sharia gave them those rights as soon they got married? Same as CG, pack a punch!

Some homework

Some homework

^^Yeah right. Will voting Labour out tomorrow and installing the Tories mean a withdrawal from Iraq? Or shall we wait for the Respect party to become a prominent force? Give me a break please. I'm beginning to think your distorted comments on Sharia are done on purpose just to malign it. You are well aware (and I’ve already stated) that no nation is currently fully applying Sharia law but you keep referring to its shortcomings based on examples I’ve already stated against! Wassup? Scared if you actually read up on Sharia and how it was applied before its corruption may actually make you agree with it? Cut the 'ignorant' tag please!

^^I had a feeling you would prefer mass demonstrations as apposed to direct talks! So, whose interpretation is valid, under what circumstance, how is it ratified and how does it get updated/evolve (or maybe it doesn't need to!) and what constitutes to valid argument against it. A consensus amongst the scholars is obviously going to provide the ‘interpretational’ framework. The same process (a consensus) will be used for any necessary ‘updates’. The scholars would have already ironed any arguments against any points. If you wish to challenge the scholars then you will need to go to the Majlis rather than walk the streets with a placard in a vain hope of getting noticed let alone any discourse or getting things changed. Since you are willing to trust politicians to do things for you or your cause based on the right to protest, why are you not willing to do the same for learned scholars based on your right to go to the Majlis?

^^If you dont agree with a ruler who wishes to abide by the tenets of his faith in relation to those he is ruling over then I'm afraid you will just have to go to the majlis and air your views

^^An abbundance. Sadly it will mean many losing their riches and those who have much to lose are determined through means contrary to their deen to hang on to it. ps I'm not defending the Malay court ruling if their actions are defined as 'coercion' into keeping one a Muslim (which i think it is). This is contrary to Sharia. pps these are my opinions only

CG, If sharia is based on Islam, where in the quran does it say that you have no choice over your faith? Nowhere, but when did i say it did? Now. Not one govnt is currently practicing Sharia Law. Selectively yes but not 100% and with much hypocracy. One cannot compare these regimes who say they are Sharia compliant with that of a secular nation allowing you to protest and giving you food and drink while doing so. Compare the Sharia of the times of the just Caliphs to todays secular UK laws and we may have something to chew on.

Originally posted by Thierry: The guy asked you a simple question since the governing law in a Muslim country is Islam should the masses be governed by it. What is this nonsense about justice or no justice? I live in Britain and I frankly think most of their legal rulings are absurd and unjust; (detaining people for 28 without any charge) does that give me a reason to oppose the law. Similar in nations governed by Shariah law since they have their rulings and Jurisprudence which I personally think if adhered to properly is the most just rule of law in the world even for non Muslim. If it is crime for a Muslim to apostate publicly in Malaysia then the women knew of the law before she decided to go public. The funny thing is as soon people see something they personally don’t like in Islam the finger pointing starts mainly to the “fat rich Arabs”. Apparently these people are the root of all evil ignoring the basic fundamentals of Islam as a faith for all and not for a selected few. Ps: The Arab leadership of Islam ended with the fall of the Abbasid dynasty almost a thousand year ago The Sheria gives full rights for non-Muslims to practice their religion. Secular Laws in France do not do the same for the Hijaabi sisters. Yet they are focusing on the misuse of power by Muslim rulers and calling it Sharia with cleverly written articles which, if one is not careful, looks believable (ala the article in this thread). I wonder if we can compare the rights of individuals in Sharia Law Vs Secular Laws. Too teams as such. It will require some research but its doable. Any challengers?

Originally posted by Caano Geel: The court upheld the decision to deny her from changing her ID cards details, and consequently she cannot marry. The chief justice said that "she could not expect to convert from one religion to another on a “whim”." -- an almost 20 year old whim, but none the less, a whim in the courts eyes. Is this in accordance with Sharia?

I wish to correct an earlier statement of mine. I wish to clarify my answer to JB’s question; Is your religion enforced? My faith is not enforced by a ruler/govnt or any human being for that matter. Rather, knowing it is ‘the’ truth, it is enforced by Allah (SWT). And my belief is absolute.

JB, do you anything to add or has the wind in your sails (aided by others) eased?

^^What ruling have they made?

should anyone be ruled under a law which blatantly and unjustly discriminates against them? NO! Should they be ruled by and in accordance with the Sharia? YES! If you disagree state your case,,,,,

^^Saxib, i've given my stance. Time to give yours. I repeat Should they (non-Muslims) not be governed by Sharia?

These places sound like nice getaway for Eid ul Fitr

Originally posted by Mansa Munsa: quote:Originally posted by Northerner: ^^stop it saxib, the intentions of your original post is very transparent. A cry of 'oh now they are employing gays to further their cause' was designed to portray SL and its supporters as doing something conrary to their beliefs. You are yet to come up with anything concrete on your ascertions. We all know you have no love for SL or its supporters but finger pointing while not commenting on the goings on the south says a lot about you and others. As MMA pointed out, such stories (if you can call it that) are not your priority right now. What about the recent bombings in Puntland? The tensions in Kismaayo, the unsettled south? The occupation? But hey its not your 'style' to comment on such issues. Dont worry we understand Same goes for a few others on these here threads. Ethiopian occupation I despised from the beginning ..it is on record.. Kismanyo tension is in my concern and Puntland bombings is to be blamed on Adde and A. Yusuf alone.. my views are not secretive and I address issues case by case...with all that said your response is still three zigma away from the target,I say The burden of proof (if you have any that is) is on you dear lad. Sensationalist write ups ala The Sun will not be accepted. Now, show me the money!

Maakhir You seem to be repeating Mansa Munsa's line here again without anything concrete to suggest these guys were a) invited and b)are actually employed by the SL authorities to speak on their behalf. What should we 'as Muslims' be shocked about? A gay man writing a piece on SL in the comforts of his office on Fleet Street? Didnt have you down as one who takes things in before seeing the evidence.

Should non-Muslims living in Islamic countries not be governed by Sharia? CG, what do you mean which kind of Sharia?

LoL He was searched (very embarrassing) but i'm actually glad he was. Maybe he should release the old woman who is in jail for not allowing a business man to build on her land!

^^stop it saxib, the intentions of your original post is very transparent. A cry of 'oh now they are employing gays to further their cause' was designed to portray SL and its supporters as doing something conrary to their beliefs. You are yet to come up with anything concrete on your ascertions. We all know you have no love for SL or its supporters but finger pointing while not commenting on the goings on the south says a lot about you and others. As MMA pointed out, such stories (if you can call it that) are not your priority right now. What about the recent bombings in Puntland? The tensions in Kismaayo, the unsettled south? The occupation? But hey its not your 'style' to comment on such issues. Dont worry we understand Same goes for a few others on these here threads.

JB, They are fearful that allowing this woman to change her religious identity on her ID may encourage/make it seem OK for others to leave Islam and inturn be governed by civil laws. You should be asking, Is what they are doing the right thing to do? a) Allowing her ID card to say Cristian instead of Muslim is not an issue, or at least shouldnt be an issue as she has renounced Islam already. b) Being governed by civil law and not Sheria 'is' an issue as all should be governed by the Sheria in the first place(incl non muslims). There is no compulsion in religion ya JB as you sadly (for you) already know.

^^Say what? The article talks of an Apostate woman and her battle to be governed by civil secular laws rather than Sheria Law and not whether she can actually leave Islam as she has already done so (thats another topic). Read the article with different shades please. This is the most important part of the article: The highest court, the Federal Court, will make the final decision on whether Muslims who renounce their faith must still answer to Islamic courts. All its inhabitants should be ruled by Sheria Law in the first place. You said something about 'suffocating'? Try the 'SOL post a random piece on Islam and take it at face value' cloth. A proven self suffocating tool

JB, give up the hollow rhetoric will you?