sharma-arke451

Nomads
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    625

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by sharma-arke451

  1. Posted

    *Ibtisam;754740 wrote:
    Qofku haadu guursaado, wuuxu guursaado iyo siidu uu guursaado asaga ayaa yaqaan, laakin I always find people who use to stand on street corners, endless phone calls and strange Somali dating style afterwards lecturing others about how to get married with impossible requirements or creating this fear as if people are out of control savages or sex maniacs who jump each other on the road at day light. :rolleyes:

     

    P.s. Nothing about this shikh's- general comment- so now when ever I see someone lecturing about how to get married or even interactions with the other gender- I aks them 1) How did you get married 2) Do you work 3) How do you treat your cousin? depending on their responses i might be open to dacwa..
    :o

    Militant emotions.

  9. Posted

    she is in love, or at least, me thinks. I mean caaliyah. Dee inantu weey guur jeceshahayee, allow usahal mid gurdoon ahoo wanaajiyo, amin.

  10. Posted

    xiinfaniin;754189 wrote:
    ^^
    :D
    :D

     

    Great post. But it confuses the issues as Johnny B called it out. AMISOM is a security arrangement that reflects the lack of genuine Somali institutions. It did not invade Somalia. It came through UN sanctioned mandate, narrow mandate at that. It is an issue nevertheless that needs to be addressed. And I am sure once Somali capacity is improved through whatever means, AMISOM will not be a difficult issue to solve. But equating AMISOM to the full Kenyan invasion is simply ignoring the facts.

    What a double standard.

    Foreign invasion has no classes and category. Amisom, ethiopia and kenya, all take the same ruling. naar meel qaboow malahan.

     

    And by the way, even the maamul goboledyada dhisan, especially, pland iyo sland, dee foreign invasion kama marno.

  11. Posted

    in my opinion, you lack focus and sincerity. however the truth is bitter, just say it. why on the defence all the time? you can be wrong my friend, even once. you opinions are not always right, neither anyone else's his/her.

  13. Posted

    ailamos;749880 wrote:
    I think what I stated above explains my reasoning very well. If not, then please be specific as to where I am being unclear.

     

    As for my statement, there are several different 'forms' of Muslims e.g, some who want to give equal shares of inheritance to both their sons and daughters, some (women) who may fall in love with a non-Muslim and would like to marry him, some who may have an (alcoholic) drink occasionally, and so on. To have Shari'ah is to force everyone (whether you are a "liberal" Muslim or a "conservative" Muslim) in one pot and tell them: "look you're a Muslim and this is how you should live your life because you're obviously too incompetent to make your own decisions regarding your faith". A secular system will tell you none such, you are your own regulator of faith because faith is between you and The Almighty.

     

    I am of the opinion that no one should force their version of morality on others. People should be able to come to their own conclusions regarding faith, God and how to live their life. I personally think it is a form of weakness in faith that one should require fear of punishment in order to be a good Muslim or a decent human being for that matter. And that people who have a necessity for such rules suffer from moral poverty.

    good enough. the word ''some'' shows exceptions, and cannot be used as a rule or majority,

     

    to norf: weel walbo waxa kujiro ayaa kadaato. ailamos waxbo yuusan isku kaa qarin, waxaaa kadhax guuxaayo,

    . I personally think it is a form of weakness in faith that one should require fear of punishment in order to be a good Muslim or a decent human being for that matter. And that people who have a necessity for such rules suffer from moral poverty.

    and that's why he will never understand you. dee marbo meel umbu kasoo jeesan. straight umawadi karo warka

  14. Posted

    it is very important to appreciate, the difference between rationality and justice.

     

    the stoning to death, of a married man/women,when they commit zinaa, can be better comprehended when you measure it against the evil of adultery.

    how do you take adultery? or what does it mean to you?

     

    do the other laws have inheritance jurisprudence?

    the difference in the people being addressed, is a better factor to consider, when you really want to understand the islamic law on inheritance.

    just to highlight this: who is closest to you in kin, between your sisters and brothers? or even you father and mom? what about your aunt and uncle? everyone will definitely favour one over the other, but for justice to prevail and not equality, ALLAH has set the limits.

     

    note: if you are indirectly saying, men=to women and hence equal inheritance, we will tackle it differently.

  18. Posted

    NGONGE;749615 wrote:
    That was the argument when the Ethiopians came to Somalia in 2006. It was a foolish argument then and shall remain a foolish argument whenever some confused Muslim, nationalist or sensationalist uses it. You may choose to muddy the water but the aggressor in my eyes is clear. It is all those that seek to murder innocents to forward their own interests. I make no distinction nor any allowances when it comes to their faith (Muslim or otherwise). You on the other hand, and in your underdeveloped sense of clanisim, would still shout "tolaaye" even when he that got killed poses a greater danger to you than to those who killed him (gaalo or no gaalo). Wax fahan.

    OK.

    definitely, you won't tell me, killing a u.s. soldier in afghanistan and killing a somali man/women in front of a tfg office is the same. the former receives my applaud, while the latter i denounce with the strongest words possible.

    having said that, ngonge, you don't seem to grasp the principle of justice. for example

    if a boy always says ''i will kill my math teacher'' and urges his friends to kill him,is it in order for the teacher to kill the boy, and end up justifying his killing??

    ngonge, you said; sheikh anwar was calling for the death of the innocent kufar, and by them killing him, you say '' good riddance'''' dee what is the logic in that?

  19. Posted

    NGONGE;749612 wrote:
    ^^ Waxba ii maad sheegin, adeer. You gave me the usual argument of "if", "what" and "but". WAX SHEEG!

    hadee kuu sheegayeee, maadan ifahmin?

    i said,

    in lagu farxo dilka qof muslim ah, ain't something that needs arguments for and against.

    after all, who is innocent to you may be the actual victimiser .

  21. Posted

    NGONGE;749581 wrote:
    And now when the leaders of this idiotic group get blow up by some random drone, the soft hearted amongst us will lament their loss and say "sheikh fulan used to do heart warming sermons".

    hahaha. walee what a rebuttal. sheikh anwar al-awlaki (a.h.r.) maxaa kudawa dhigay?

     

    the bottom line is, killing an aggressor and killing a muslim are never the same. you decide

  22. Posted

    NGONGE;749398 wrote:
    Typical new SOL nobody with no argument to forward or ability to express himself. Wax sheeg, adeer, wax sheeg.

    hade kuu sheegay, ee maadan fahmin?

    i said

    in lagu farxo dilka qof muslim ah, ain't something that needs arguments for and against.

    after all, who is innocent to you may be the actual victimiser .

  24. Posted

    NGONGE;749379 wrote:
    That's an argument I suppose but it's not one that sways me. When a man preaches the killing of
    innocents
    (in the cowardly way that he did) I don't begin to consider him a fellow "bull", as it were. Marka, I'm more than glad that his like get killed by whomever is willing to take them out.

     

    Of course, there is a counter argument about the actual way the killing took place but when it comes to faith, I'm glad this man and his like are getting taken out one by one (and I'm usually a fence setter by nature).

    odeyga weey isaga dhax yaacday xaajada.

    premier league laga hadli maayo ma

  25. Posted

    Garnaqsi;749151 wrote:
    That's a non-point -- one that's often made in the theological folly of mistaking absolutist dogma for epistemological perfection. .

    ~~An indication of floccinaucinihilipilification. to be more precise, you sound existentialism. indeed, a militant atheism.

     

    That's not true. As I've said in the above post, to say this would be a blow to relativity amounts to say, among other things, that relativity wouldn't hold if the so-called gauge invariance is lost, which is ridiculous. I'm sure most physicists would agree with me.

    is a major blow ≠ wouldn't hold. language matters, my learned, scientist friend.

     

    For as long as we have that wonderful procedure called the scientific method. If our views would remain stagnant, physics would be dull, boring, and unenlightening that it would, in fact, border religion. Lack of changing views is really tantamount to lack of progress.

    at least you testify the feeble building blocks of some scientific theories. knowledge needs concrete and unshakable facts, not wrong assumptions, that need adjustments from time to time. imperfection in action.

     

    When the scientifically illiterate try to throw around baseless and outlandish claims of the implications on an experiment in science, I would go so far as to say there is moral obligation on all students of science and scientifically literate laypeople to shun such claims.

    self proclaimed. indha adkaa ninku/naagtu, hadbo kii sax ah.