Salamz, If I am not mistaken, the Sahibi Zubair ibn awwam took off his shirt one day and a someone saw that he had over 70 scars on his body. The person asked Zubair about the scars and how he (Zubair) had acquired them. Zubair replied that he used to be a 'SHIELD' for the Rasul (salallahu caliyhe wasilm) during the battles, not because he was asked to be a 'SHIELD' but because of his love of the rasul (salallahu caliyhe wasilm). Allahu Akbir! Now that is called 'LOVE FOR THE RASUL (SALLAHU CALIYHE WASILM). Fi Amanillah

Salamz, I can't help but to remember that ayat in sura tauba about masjid Dirar [106] There are others who built a Masjid for mischievous motives (Masjid-e-Zirar), to spread disbelief and to disunite the believers, and an outpost for one (Abu ‘Amir) who had made war against Allah and His Rasool before. They will indeed swear that their intentions are nothing but good; but Allah declares that they are absolute liars.[107] You should never stand to offer Salah in it.... Fi Amanillah

Salamz, Originally posted by Legend of Zu: I think this is The Idea of the Year!!! Khayr: Are you saying we shouldn't discuss, voice our believes, improve our selves, encourage, advise and help each other because we are created for Ibaadah??? Can you re read your post and just think about it lil further? Dude... I think it is time you revisit your concept of Ibaadah and the purpose of Life! If there was the concept of 'radio' or 'print journalism' or even the 'internet' a few centuries ago, then could you imagine say ...Imam Ghazzali going on 'Ghazzali I belief' or Abu Hanifah on 'Hanifah I belief' or even for that matter our great grandparents. I certainly can't and it is because they would view these forums ('THIS I BELIEVE' etc.) to be nothing more then 'SELF PROMOTION'. Nothing more then feeding the 'XAWA', the Hubris...and that is exactly what it is for if what otherwise, then how come the great souls of this world did not discover these 'mediums i.e. radio, online radio, internet etc. Why in the world would such mediums come to be at this time in our life cycle when 'Sentimentalization (e.g. If I feel it is right, then it must be right) is the Paradigm for Truth. Just look at this thread, b/c most of the nomads that responded 'think', 'feel' that it is a good idea, happens to make the whole 'THIS I BELIEVE' medium to be GOOD and RIGHT. I see more danger, more damage then good and rather then it (THIS I BELIEVE medium) drawing 'MOST PEOPLE'(Question-Well what if it helps me to draw closer to Allah?...Well, Revelation, Divine Laws were sent for 'MOST PEOPLE' including the 'exceptionial ones too', so you can't propose an 'IDEA', a 'CONCEPT' without relating to its affect to the 'MAJORITY OF PEOPLE) to becoming 'ABD-ALLAH', it will likely draw them to becoming 'Abd-Al-Insan' aka Self-Praise. Fi Amanillah

Salamz, Anyone know of any online arabic islamic bookstores that might have such collecitions as Al-Hakim's hadith collection or Imam Bihaqi etc. Let me know inshallah

Salamz, MashaAllah, I am envious of those that have the gift of memorization and eloquant recitation of the quran. Such a hidya and ammana is unquantifiable! 'The Most honored of my Ummah are those that carry the quran' 'Allahuma ajcal al quran raabica qulubina, wa nuura sadrina'' Ameen

Salamz, I don't agree with having your personal 'ONLINE RADIO' mouthpiece or 'Blogs' for that matter because they promote every kind of individual fantasy and promotes INDIVIDUALISM and the Right to be Heard . All other subject matters become second and any 'talks or claims' of 'truth' is cheapened to being known as 'THIS I BELIEVE' or 'THIS JAMMA BELIEVES' OR 'THIS STEVE JOB BELIEVES'. So infact, what is being promoted is nothing but 'HUBRIS' aka HAWA aka EGOS! This doesn't aid in the purpose of Bani Adam (according to the Quran) which is to be Abd-Allah (Slave of God). Instead, it supports the opposite-Man is his own GOD! Meaning it helps to supports the NAFS by INLFATING IT. Why else would people be 'enthuasitic' about it? This is just an extension of living in a time where first Radio was thought to be a necessity for society...then the Medium of Television (Visuals that made people 'STARS')...then the advent of the Internet (wherein annonymity helped created 'WORLDWIDE' scholars,actors, etc. via self gloating websites and blogs.... I know that the Usual Suspects will try to draw up 'Straw Man' agruments but so be it! Fi Amanillah

Salamz, From the above cited site that Sharmkee gave Any Muslim can benefit from reading hadiths from al-Bukhari and Muslim, whether on his own or with others. As for studying hadith, Sheikh Shuayb al-Arnaut, with whom my wife and I are currently reading Imam al-Suyuti's Tadrib al-rawi [The training of the hadith narrator], emphasizes that the science of hadith deals with a vast and complex literature, a tremendous sea of information that requires a pilot to help one navigate, without which one is bound to run up on the rocks. In this context, Sheikh Shuayb once told us, "Whoever doesn't have a sheikh, the Devil is his sheikh, in any Islamic discipline." In other words, there are benefits the ordinary Muslim can expect from personally reading hadith, and benefits that he cannot, unless he is both trained and uses other literature, particularly the classical commentaries that explain the hadiths meanings and their relation to Islam as a whole. The benefits one can derive from reading al-Bukhari and Muslim are many: general knowledge of such fundamentals as the belief in Allah, the messengerhood of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), the Last Day and so on; as well as the general moral prescriptions of Islam to do good, avoid evil, perform the prayer, fast Ramadan, and so forth. The hadith collections also contain many other interesting points, such as the great rewards for acts of worship like the midmorning prayer (duha), the night vigil prayer (tahajjud), fasting on Mondays and Thursdays, giving voluntary charity, and So on. Anyone who reads these and puts them into practice in his life has an enormous return for reading hadith, even more so if he aims at perfecting himself by attaining the noble character traits of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) mentioned in hadith. Whoever learns and follows the prophetic example in these matters has triumphed in this world and the next. Without a guiding hand, the untrained reader will misunderstand many of the hadiths he reads, and these mistakes, if assimilated and left uncorrected, may pile up until he can never find his way out of them, let alone become a scholar. QUOTE] At length, I produced a manuscript of selected hadiths of al-Bukhari, a sort of do-it-yourself sharia manual. I still use it as an index to hadiths in al-Bukhari, though the fiqh conclusions of my amateur ijtihads are now rather embarrassing. When hadiths were mentioned that seemed to contradict each other, I would simply choose whichever I wanted, or whichever was closer to my Western habits. After all, I said, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) was never given a choice between two matters except that he chose the easier of the two (Sahih al-Bukhari, 4.230: 3560). For example, I had been told that it was not sunna to urinate while standing up, and had heard the hadith of Aisha that anyone who says the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) passed urine while standing up, do not believe him (Musnad al-Imam Ahmad. 6 vols. Cairo 1313/1895. Reprint. Beirut: Dar Sadir, n.d., 6.136). But then I read the hadith in al-Bukhari that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) once urinated while standing up (Sahih al-Bukhari, 1.66: 224), and decided that what I had first been told was a mistake, or that perhaps it did not matter much. Only later, when I began translating the Arabic of the Shafi'i fiqh manual Reliance of the Traveller did I find out how the scholars of sharia had combined the implications of these hadiths; that the standing of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) to pass urine was to teach the Umma that it was not unlawful (haram), but rather merely offensive (makruh)--though in relation to the Prophet such actions were not offensive, but rather obligatory to do at least once to show the Umma they were not unlawful--or according to other scholars, to show it was permissible in situations in which it would prevent urine from spattering one's clothes. In retrospect, my early misadventures in hadith enabled me to appreciate the way the fiqh I later studied had joined between all hadiths, something I had personally been unable to do. And I understood why, of the top hadith Imams, Imam al-Bukhari took his Shafi'i jurisprudence from the disciple of Imam Shafi'i, Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr al-Humaydi (al-Subki, Tabaqat al-Shafi'iyya al-kubra. 10 vols. Cairo: Isa al-Babi al-Halabi, 1383/1964, 2.214), and why Imams Muslim, al-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, and al-Nasai also followed the Shafi'i school (Mansur Ali Nasif, al-Taj al-jami li al-usul fi ahadith al-Rasul. 5 vols. Cairo 1382/1962. Reprint. Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi, n.d., 1.16), as did al-Bayhaqi, al-Hakim, Abu Nuaym, Ibn Hibban, al-Daraqutni, al-Baghawi, Ibn Khuzayma, al-Suyuti, al-Dhahabi, Ibn Kathir, Nur al-Din al-Haythami, al-Mundhiri, al-Nawawi, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Taqi al-Din al-Subki and others; why Imams such as Abd al-Rahman ibn al-Jawzi followed the madhhab of Ahmad ibn Hanbal; and why Abu Jafar al-Tahawi, Ali al-Qari, Jamal al-Din al-Zaylai (the African sheikh of Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, thought by some to have been even more knowledgeable than him), and Badr al-Din al-Ayni followed the Hanafi school. These facts speak eloquently as to the role of hadith in the sharia in the eyes of these Imams, for whom it was not a matter of practicing either fiqh or hadith, as some Muslims seriously suggest today, but rather, the fiqh of hadith embodied in the traditional madhhabs which they followed. There would seem to be room for many of us to benefit from their example. Have any nomads experienced this confusion in reading hadiths?ayats of quran? I find that 'opponents' of muslims try to 'take out of context' ahadith i.e. Women leading in salat Imam Tabarani collection and quranic ayats i.e. no complusion in relgion ayat. Do you as a muslim sometimes get tongue tied? In Tasfir study, there is what is called 'NASIKH-Abbrogation' meaning one ayat supercedes another ayat. The measuring stick for NASIKH is the SEERAH/LIFE of the Rasul (salallahu caliyhe waslim). Sharmkee walaal, JazaAllah Khayrun

'verbbaalissm' serving the illusion of thoughttt R.G. JB Science neither disappears, nor will it deny you to be a beleiver.Science deleivers knowledge through the normal senses, knowledge implies a beleif, not the other way around JB Yes i consider myself a scientist whatever that may mean to you Fair to say that- Science is content to ignore certain things as a result of its preoccupations, without formally denying them. So all Science has to do is 'Raise Theories and call 'Observations' as 'Scientific facts' and whether they are disproven or not, that does not matter, what matters is the 'Theories' that have been formulated, to provide a 'counter argument' to something else. It merely offers a 'SUGGESTIVE' explanation and that is the one of the roles of 'SCIENCE'-to say provide 'SUGGESTIONS' that hopefully lead to 'Rethinking' aka DOUBT! Hence, an 'IMPLICIT DENIAL' of all that is 'OTHER' then 'SCIENTIFIC OBSERVATION'. The Evolution theory itself is logically invulnerable to attacks on the motives of its proponents, and ID can NEVER be a blow to evolutive science I.e. I hearby offer you and all ID supporters the explanations against examples of proposed irreducible complexity, and by extrapolating from very well-corroborated genetic data to show you that. the variously proposed items of irreducible complexity are in fact reproductively related and thus not independently designed, (unless the designer 'wants us to think that'!) If there are limits on the plasticity of genetic change these limits do not preclude the natural macro-evolutionary diversification of specieschanges from one species into another,Indeed, that it follows from the known nature of genetics that one must predict the diversification of species. JB, This is not congruent with that you said earlier: jb If a naturalist, Atheist etc etc , fails to DISPROVE the idea(theory) of creationisim scientifically , He or she doesen´t necessarily proved the contrary.and that is PURE science Darwin was aware of those difficulties that is why as pure natuaralist he presented that chapter and hoped for a brigher mind in future generations to shed ligh on it. Evolution makes a 'suggestion' i.e. We come from a single organism and basis it on 'assumptions' that continue to have gaps in them but the 'fact' that darwin and his followers 'admit to these gaps', strengthen its agruments. Is that right JB? Jb, Why are the rules different for them? What one party can get away with all their suggestions and the other is held at 'pen point'? JB neither beleive in creationisim becouse it is based on the possibility of a supereme Intelligent Designer having designed it JUST so, nor do i beleive in Naturalisim just becouse it is based on the propability of life beeing a self-driven mechanism (coincidental actions and reactions if u like). So your purpose in this 'debate' is then what: Debate for the sake of being heard Debate to oppose creationism Debate to oppose Naturalism via Evolution (which I don't see JB doing) Debate for the sake of being heard (again!) To wrap it sxb , Evolution theory had survived a century old scientific challenge, while creation theory sentenced millions to death when they questioned it´s robustness. In nuce-This is the biasnesses that you have been pushing all long. All under eo nomine Scienta! Here is a syllogism for you since you are an avid fan of them: If Religion supports it, then it is wrong. Intelligent Design supports Relgion. Therefore, Intelligent Design is wrong. Garaad the problem of creationism are many, worst beeing the following stance, "we have the one truth/way/god/mantra/hakuna matata/spagetti monster. ' Follow us or die ". Nothing is wrong with having 'DIFFERENT VIEW POINTS' as long as they share COMMON PRINCIPLES i.e. GOD Don't 'Scientists' have deffering 'THEORIES' but have common traits i.e. If it can be proven EMPRICALLY i.e. through 5 senses, then it is right. JB ID lays great stress on moral questions, but the morality ID and it´s religious theories preach is one of meek submission, of passive acceptance, and thus, of justification of existing social evils. This morality substitutes prayer and appeals for divine assistance for struggle and protest against social injustice. The entire Idealist philosophy is contrived, with deliberateness, to bolster the status quo. Does this sum up your 'line of thought'

Salamz, You can search the SOL topics on the topic of Polygamy because it has been discussed over and...over and....over....and...(you get the point!) Would you ask your husband-to-be to sign a contract that denies him a second wife Denies...to deny someone means to Forbid them, to make something HARAM for them. Haram means FORBIDDEN But to help answer your question sis, In the Deen, there is a principle called 'ISTIXLAL' which says that 'YOU CAN'T MAKE SOMETHING THAT IS HARAM to be HALAL and something that is HALAL to be HARAM' i.e. You can't tell someone that they can't marry a bengali muslim simply because they are bengali.

My Definition of Humanism: Human Well-Being is the Reason d'etre fo the creation of MAN. Other Definitions of Humanism: Humanism is a progressive lifestance that, without supernaturalism , affirms our ability and responsibility to lead meaningful, ethical lives capable of adding to the greater good of humanity. • American Humanist Association Humanism is a rational philosophy informed by science, inspired by art, and motivated by compassion. Affirming the dignity of each human being, it supports the maximization of individual liberty and opportunity consonant with social and planetary responsibility. It advocates the extension of participatory democracy and the expansion of the open society, standing for human rights and social justice. Free of supernaturalism , it recognizes human beings as a part of nature and holds that values—be they religious, ethical, social, or political—have their source in human experience and culture. Humanism thus derives the goals of life from human need and interest rather than from theological or ideological abstractions, and asserts that humanity must take responsibility for its own destiny. • The Humanist Magazine Reference Page Deo volente, this will make things clearer for you. In the future, JB, festina lente!

Salamz, Nur saxib, I didn't know that my words would be used against you to support some people's insidious ways. Walaal, Raaliiy aaxoo!

Originally posted by Ducaqabe: I think some of you forgot that Socod_badne is a neocon wannabe nomad who advocates for racial profiling of Muslims and believes Sharia laws are outdated and unsuitable. Knowing this much about him, it does not surprise me at all that he now calls for “Someone oughta put a leash around their necks and keep close eye on them...they're clearly out of their minds.†May this be his dream job? Perhaps. Socad Badne, How much do they pay you to be a 'CHEERLEADER'?

That is to say, human well-being (eudaimonia) is and should be the highest aim of moral thought and conduct. In otherwords, HUMANISM! Which in Islam would be considered SHIRK! Why? Human Well-Being is the Reason d'etre fo the creation of MAN. That is the goal and this goal contradicts every, revelation, every revealed religion. the defination of what is happy/good life? is something we need to come to terms with , and is highly personal. Hence....HEDONISM!!! The entire Idealist philosophy is contrived, with deliberateness, to bolster the status quo. Therefore not encouraging man to TRY to master his environment or do something about it, on the contrary the answer is simple concise " an Intelligent Designer created and wants it so" Questions are encouraged provided: -The one asking the question is SINCERE for answers and not playing DEVIL'S ADVOCATE. -The one asking the question is seeking something HIGER. -The one asking the question respects his subject. Therefore not encouraging man to TRY to master his environment or do something about it What would be the PURPOSE to 'Master his environment'? If the purpose is driven by HUMANISM-MAN'S WELL BEING for the sake of WELL BEING...then NO, it is not encouraged. However, if the purpose is to draw closer to the ESSENCE OF MAN, which is GOD...then YES, encouraged!

Originally posted by Shirwac: Inbreeding has its advantages, Every body in the city was somehow related to him.

I emulate kuffar ppl's generosity towards others they share nothing with, their empathy, their ability to foster lasting amity and social cohesion among the myriad religious, political and racial groups constituting their societies. TWISTING WORDS....TWISTING WORDS What comes to mind is the hadith wherein the rasul (salallahu caliyhe wasilm) said that we would imitate the NON-MUSLIMS so much so that even if they....went into a fox whole! WHY? Well if the FOX shows'generosity towards others', then the muslims will think good of him and not see how that 'meat' that the FOX wants to share and show 'generosity towards others' was received in the first place and the muslims won't question the 'quallity' of the FOX's 'generosity'....hey CRAP can be GOLD as long as it is from the 'generosity' of the FOX-RIGHT! The FOX and his KINGDOM will let you, the MUSLIM live in peace and tells you to promote 'PLURALISM' so long as it does not harm the FOX and intrude the FOX's Life, Business affairs etc. Socad Badne, Are you suffering from IDENTITY CRISIS saxib? Are you not proud of your ISLAMIC LINEAGE?

Salamz, Nur, I see you are MAKING UP for your previous posts in the 'WOMEN' section. Saxib, You are a very good POLITICIAN!

Salamz, Do we not obey speed laws for fear of being ticketed? Do we not avoid stealing for fear of going to jail? Or kill/harm others? These are basically restraints on ppl's behaviours by the laws of their society, practically telling them what to do and not to do but do you see ppl being unhappy as result? Then, why should they be unhappy if the roles were reversed, and the restraining force on ppl were God's laws and not man's laws? I don't see the difference here. I think that this is the RELIGIOUS view and wherein the Islamic culture that you still identify with, has left some marks on you, Socad Badne! Which way do you sway 50%+ of the time RELIGION or SCIENCE??? 7 PGS WORTH OF RAMBLING, and you don't even believe in what you are arguing for. Scientism via Evolution which forms the foundation of Modern, PRO-PROGRESS thinking, does not believe in obeying PERMENANT, UNCHANGING LAWS i.e. RELGIOUS LAWS, DIVINE LAWS. What Einstein and most people nowadays want, is CHANGING LAWS that succumb to people's WHIMS. i.e. if we VOTE for it, then we can put it into place and b/c the MAJORITY voted for it, then it is RIGHT! This is what Evolution preaches, constant CHANGE and non-Permenance! i.e. MAN IS THE CREATOR OF HIS OWN DESTINY and hence, why a MUSLIM can not be PRO-SCIENTISM, PRO-EVOLUTION etc. b/c if you vouch for these IDEOLOGIES, THEN WHAT IS TO SAY THAT YOU WON'T view the SHARIA in the same light of EVOLUTION aka CONSTANT CHANGE. WHAT IS TO SAY THAT YOU WON'T DEEM the HADDUD LAWS i.e. cutting off hands, lashing the fornicator etc. to be OUTDATED! Some written rules and regulation maybe needed, I don't know. But I think somethings are eminently obvious and given common sense is allowed to prevail, inimical clash and collide won't have to take place. Science has no say on spiritual, after world affairs...religion has no say on the science brain surgery, string theory or deep space exploration. Which is a way of LIFE SCIENCE OR RELIGION? If Religion is a way of Life (for muslims), then shouldn't science be REGULATED by RELGIOUS LAWS, hence if certain 'SCIENTIFIC THEORIES' oppose RELIGION LAWS, then can't these theories be REJECTED. In other words, which one is your THINKING, your WAY OF LIFE derived from-SCIENCE OR RELIGION? For the avg. person, it is NEITHER, but rather their own 'PERSONAL FEELINGS' towards a subject matter i.e. IF IT MAKES 'RATIONAL SENSE' , then it is RIGHT! Socadne, You are also 'SECULARIZING KNOWLEDGE' here b/c RELGION (A WAY OF LIFE) encompasses PRACTICAL matters in the daily life of BANI ADAM aka HUMANS. Religion doesn't only deal with RITUALISTIC subjects and CANON LAWS, but covers such matters as allocating taxes to cover city pot holes, researching issues on cancer, population control eetc. Problem is RELIGION does not view most subjects 'SEPERATLELY' but rather 'INTER-RELATIONAL aka ONTHOLOGICAL. i.e. Cure for Cancer What is the Sociological origin and impact of Cancer? What is the Anthropological origin of CANCER? How does CURING CANCER aid the Community in becoming BETTER SLAVES OF GOD (AFTER all that is the IDEAL for the MUSLIM-becoming ABD-ALLAH) ETC. In the end analysis, it is the consensus of the society where the subject is debated that will ultimately decide. You have proven my point! CONSENSUS OF SOCIETY (regulating what is RIGHT AND WRONG) v. REVELATION (regulating what is RIGHT AND WRONG) I know which group you have chosen but how about Johnny B, IGaDaaRiwaaYada, Bakar, Basshi etc.

Salams, Northerner saxib, I agree with you whole heartdly about your observations for I too saw and heard muslims in the muslim world who were confused about their identity. I saw NATIONALISM to play a big role for the avg. muslim....i saw that SECULAR EDUCATION to be the admiration and adoration of every muslim family...hafiz wo?alim who-yeah that program is for 'after school' :rolleyes: I saw just like the hadith says, Arabs competing with one another in building TALL STRUCTURES. Skyscrapers galooore! In the 'western hemisphere', the muslims are mostly JUST AS CONFUSED but b/c they are seen as 'FOREIGNERS' AKA FISH OUT OF WATER, by the majority of westerners, the avg. muslim becomes conscious of his 'ISLAM' whether they like it or not i.e. You are Mohamed or Abdul and you look like one too, no matter how many name changes or gucci suits and Ph.d's you aquire! Its a sad state of affairs, but the Islamic tradition and culture, I think is most vibrant in the poor, rural areas of the muslim world were people have adabs that are drawn out of the Islamic tradition- engrained into them. Fi Amanillah

Salamad, I was reading something earleir this week how the mukhabaraat subdued muslims. They have a technique called 'CONFRONTATIONNNAL ARGUMENTATION' which basically measn harassing the MUSLIM and evoking a reaction out of them. Basically, they want to frustrate the hell out of you and make you SCREAM, TOUCH THEM, DISOBEY THEM, so they can CHARGE you with something and lock you away and then LET THE MEDIA take care of you and CHEW YOU OUT!!! You are in a LOSE-LOSE situation, set up for Failure!!!

were you abused as a child, scared to smile, they called you ugly Hey Pretty Tone saxib, that line sounds familiar...Ether!!! Layzie, Take it eazy sis, it a a new season!

Salamz, blinds us to the real issues and gives us a false sense of individual achievement? False sense of individual achievement is what I got when close to min'm wage jobs is all a degree guarantees, if u don't have employment experience. False sense of individual achievement is what I got when Student Loans called me up to COUGH UP money that I used for a 'Honor Degree (no spelling error)'. I was set up for Failure and I bought into DREAMS. But how do you stop this MACHINE when it is best TeleMarketers are Family and Peers? Its a farm system that leads to no where!!!

103:1 By (the Token of) Time (through the ages), 103:2 Verily Man is in loss, 103:3 Except such as have Faith, and do righteous deeds, and (join together) in the mutual teaching of Truth, and of Patience and Constancy. 103:1 By (the Token of) Time (through the ages), 103:2 Verily Man is in loss, This destroys the Premise of Evolution that Man is ever EVOLVING. Rather, as time passes... MAN DEVOLVES....MAN DECLINES... .................. A formula for SALVATION HAVING FAITH Faith in what? In what Allah has revealed, in the 6 pillars of Iman (Belief in Allah, His Angels, His Messengers, His Books, The Day of Judgement and Allah's Will (The Good and the Bad)) Doing RIGHTEOUS DEEDS i.e. Following the Sunnah of the rasul (sallahu caliyhe wasilm), following the revealed scriptures, staying away from vices that GOD frowns upons (join together) in the mutual teaching of Truth, and of Patience -Brotherhood/Siserhood -Working towards Salvation with each other -Adhering to TRUTH via Revelations and Messengers -Patiences with each other, with one's self, with ALLAH. Fi Amanillah

^^^ Is one of the nairobi sheeks young looking? Saaxib, maa sheek shareef baa laaga saarey masjidka :confused: SOL's NUR war aa lagaa duuno!!!

Double Post

Salamz, Originally posted by Femme.: Proud Muslimah & Khayr, If your not in an Islamic country then your religious preferences have to take a back seat. Doesn't matter if your Muslim, Christian, Hindu or Jew. There are some cases in which citing religion as a reason to go against a medical procedure is over-ruled (ex. Jehovah's Witness parents refusing blood transfusions or organ donations for their children---they are not allowed and can be thrown in jail if they interfere). P.S. Does it really go against Islamic teachings? There have been many cases in which autopsies revealed that a person was murdered by poisionous injections when it all appearances it looked that they died a natural death. Wouldn't you want to rule out murder? Or as long as a person is dead...thats it? I believe autopsies for suspicious deaths to be necessary. There are many things you can learn from it. If your not in an Islamic country then your religious preferences have to take a back seat. In Western liberal democratic countries, Pluralism is encouraged and is a liberal principle that protects the general population including religious institutions and people's religious beliefs and practices. There are cases where the state law supercedes religious practices: when religious beliefs and practices infringe on someone else's rights i.e. when religious beliefs and practices threaten public safety i.e. a bird flu epedmic and no cure yet and the deceased person is thought to have dies of 'bird flu'. In the case of a minor, who doesn't not have the capacity to judge and interpret legal terminology, then the state can over rule the families religious request i.e. blood transfusion fo the child From the Islamic view point: Necessity overrides prohibition that is if there are certain items which are islamically prohibited, under dire necessity they can become permissible. Accept the lesser of the two harms if both can not be avoided. Public interest overrides the individual interest. Harm has to be removed at every cost if possible. Source to be cont'd.... Fi Amanillah