^^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?

^^One doesnt mind doing abit of cooking and cleaning if it means late mornings and catching up on the sports news Meet ups with fellow house husbands at the local cafe talking sport Seriously though, the roles of both husband and wife are more (or should be more) intertwined than most people think. Looking after the kids, cleaning, cooking etc is no big deal if the right set up and understanding is in place. Arrogance will get us nowhere.

Not when such actions are in accordance with existing laws/rules/regulations which govern it.

Its a question of Sheria Law vs Civil Law and which one should prevail in Maylaysia in this instance. Do you honestly understand the drive some Muslims feel to FORCE others to believe and practice exactly as they do? i don't. You never do

What is wrong with that picture? I'll admit the rolls in his hair must go. LooooooooooL I wouldnt mind being a stay at home dad/husband (as long as the sports channels are paid for)