Moderate muslims...in a nutshell

Boz/BoFan · January 9, 2007

This isnt rocket science people. They are coming, and they have a plan. A plan that can be identified in any one of a billion copies of the Koran and facilitated in earnest via democratic leaders. Welcome to the suck.

observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1984530,00.html

Revealed: preachers' messages of hate

Muslim worshippers are being urged by radical clerics to ignore British law

Jamie Doward

Sunday January 7, 2007

The Observer

An undercover investigation has revealed disturbing evidence of Islamic extremism at a number of Britain's leading mosques and Muslim institutions, including an organisation praised by the Prime Minister.

Secret video footage reveals Muslim preachers exhorting followers to prepare for jihad, to hit girls for not wearing the hijab, and to create a 'state within a state'. Many of the preachers are linked to the Wahhabi strain of Islam practised in Saudi Arabia, which funds a number of Britain's leading Islamic institutions.

Just as they fund a lot of moslem institutions in the US, such as the training programs for imams in US prisons and the military.

A forthcoming Channel 4 Dispatches programme paints an alarming picture of how preachers in some of Britain's most moderate mosques are urging followers to reject British laws in favour of those of Islam. Leaders of the mosques have expressed concern at the preachers' activities, saying they were unaware such views were being disseminated.

As Captain Renault said in Casablanca, "I'm shocked --shocked!-- to find that there's gambling going on here!"

At the Sparkbrook mosque, run by UK Islamic Mission (UKIM), an organisation that maintains 45 mosques in Britain and which Tony Blair has said 'is extremely valued by the government for its multi-faith and multicultural activities', a preacher is captured on film praising the Taliban. In response to the news that a British Muslim solider was killed fighting the Taliban, the speaker declares: 'The hero of Islam is the one who separated his head from his shoulders.'

Another speaker says Muslims cannot accept the rule of non-Muslims. 'You cannot accept the rule of the kaffir [non-Muslim],' a preacher, Dr Ijaz Mian, tells a meeting held within the mosque. 'We have to rule ourselves and we have to rule the others.'

The 12-month investigation also recorded a deputy headmaster of an Islamic high school in Birmingham telling a conference at the Sparkbrook mosque that he disagrees with using the word democracy. 'They should call it ... kuffrocracy, that's their plan. It's the hidden cancerous aim of these people.' The Darul Uloom school said it no longer employed the teacher and that one of the reasons he resigned 'was the incompatibility of many of his opinions with the policies of the school'.

When contacted by The Observer, UKIM said: 'We are a nationwide organisation and hold different programmes in our mosques. We are very concerned about this. We have instructed all our branches not to allow any more speakers with radical or fundamentalist views. This has occurred as a result of an internal problem. We hired out Sparkbrook community hall, and some of the organisations that hired it allowed some speakers with views that are not our own. As a result, no more external groups will be allowed to hire the community hall at Sparkbrook.'

Elsewhere the documentary records the huge popularity of DVDs and internet broadcasts produced by extremist preachers. At the Islamic bookstore at Regent's Park Mosque in central London, DVDs of a preacher called Sheikh Yasin are sold. In one DVD, Yasin, who is promoted on the mosque's website, accuses missionaries from the World Health Organisation and Christian groups of putting the 'Aids virus' in the medicine of African people, 'which is a conspiracy'.

Another DVD on sale features Sheikh Feiz, a Saudi-trained preacher. Feiz says: 'Kaffir is the worst word that can ever be written, a sign of infidelity, disbelief, filth, a sign of dirt.'

In a statement the company that runs the bookstore said: 'We sell and supply a wide range of material and we do not necessarily agree with it. It is totally unfair to blame [us] for any of the views expressed in these lectures.'

Elsewhere, another preacher at a mosque in the East Midlands is caught on film, praying: 'God help us in our fight against the kaffir, in every field, in every department of life. We beg you to help us fight against the enemies of our religion.'

Inside the Green Lane mosque in Birmingham, a preacher is recorded saying: 'Allah has created the woman deficient.' A satellite broadcast from the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Sheikh Abdul Aziz al-Sheikh, beamed into the Green Lane mosque suggests that Muslim children should be hit if they don't pray: 'When he is seven, tell him to go and pray, and start hitting them when they are 10.' Another preacher is heard saying that if a girl 'doesn't wear hijab, we hit her'.

Another preacher says: 'The time is fast approaching where the tables are going to turn and the Muslims are going to be in the position of being uppermost in strength and, when that happens, people won't get killed - unjustly.'

In a statement to Channel 4, Lord Ahmed, the convener of the government's Preventing Extremism taskforce, said he was worried about the programme's consequences: 'While I appreciate that exaggerated opinions make good TV, they do not make for good community relations.'

A spokesman for Green Lane mosque said Islam does not denigrate women and that the instruction to hit a child was merely a smack. He accused C4 of intensifying the 'witch-hunt' against Muslims.

'Undercover Mosques', Dispatches, goes out at 8pm on Monday, 15 January.

parrot · January 9, 2007

What do you suggest we do?

Boz/BoFan · January 9, 2007

What do you suggest we do?

First, stop cow towing to their every desire in the name of tolerance and diversity.

Second, expose the Koran and recognize its not radical islam that carries out the bidding of their leader Muhammed who says anything short of world wide islamic rule is unacceptable, but just islam itself.

Should be a good start, 2 steps to what could easily be a 100 step process.

parrot · January 9, 2007

First, stop cow towing to their every desire in the name of tolerance and diversity.

Like which desires, specifically?

wiffleball · January 9, 2007

From the very little I know, It's my understanding that the Koran itself is fairly innocuous. It's the teachings of Mohammed and the other 'prophets'/scholars that lead to the most extreme viewpoints.

Though, - in a rare first - I will agree that unless moderate Islam stands up against extremism, fundamentalism of any kind - especially Islam - is diametrically opposed to Democracy. The Russians were a whole 'nother matter. They were an enemy we could predict and more or less understand. When you bring religion into the mix, there's not a lot of room for negotiation. MADD isn't a good deterent against people who don't value life. I don't see a good future for Islamic relations ahead. The only counter-balance against this is young Islam. Ironically, we're banking on corrupting Islam with Western Values as our best defense. :first:

Whodathunk Britney, Paris and their pals would be on the front line of any war??

davebg · January 9, 2007

In a statement to Channel 4, Lord Ahmed, the convener of the government's Preventing Extremism taskforce, said he was worried about the programme's consequences: 'While I appreciate that exaggerated opinions make good TV, they do not make for good community relations.'

This is the most distrubing part of that post.

Sticking your head in the sand and ignoring the reality in front of you in favor of a false sense of security in the form of "good community relations" is a recipie for disaster.

Boz/BoFan · January 9, 2007

Like which desires, specifically?

Well, namely, this: Verses in the Koran must always be understood within the context of the ultimate goal of Islam. Allah sent Mohammad (and his followers) to conquer all other religions (9:33, 48:28, 61:9). To achieve this ultimate goal of vanquishing disbelief, Muslims must convert, subjugate, or kill all non-Muslims until all religion is for Allah (2:193, 8:39; also see 9:5 and 9:29; also see [4]). This must always be kept in mind. This ultimate goal is the context which contains and overrides all contexts in Islam. If killing a non-Muslim is necessary for the advancement or the defence of Islam, then it must be done.

Also, not picking up blind people with seeing eye dogs because its against their "faith" and refusing to pick up anyone in the posession of alcohol. Insanity.

Islam is inherently incompatible with our democracy, or any government with any respect for human life and dignity.

Here is a little more for you , this is Sharia law, every muslim in the entire world, "moderate" or not would be dancing and shooting in the streets if this were passed tomorrow in the US. Enjoy.

Laws and practices under Sharia

[edit] Marriage laws

* The Muslim man who is not currently a fornicator can only marry a Muslim woman who is not currently a fornicatress or a chaste woman from the people of the book.

* The Muslim fornicator can only marry a Muslim fornicatress.

* The number of wives is limited to one. In times where there the population of men is smaller than normal, such as times of war, up to four wives can be taken, but only if they are treated equally and with the consent of the first wife.

* The Muslim woman who is not currently a fornicatress can only marry a Muslim man who is not currently a fornicator.

* The Muslim fornicatress can only marry a Muslim fornicator.

* The woman cannot marry without the consent of her guardian. If she marries, her husband becomes her new guardian.

* The guardian may choose a suitable partner for a virgin girl, but the girl is free to contest and has the right to say 'no'.

* The guardian cannot marry the divorced woman or the widow if she didn't ask to be married.

* The number of husbands is limited to one.

* "Do not marry unless you give your wife something that is her right." It is obligatory for a man to give bride wealth (gift)to the woman he marries.[5]

o He is also not allowed to intercourse in front of his sons if they are present in the room.

[edit] Divorce laws

* A woman who wishes to be divorced needs the consent of her husband. If he consents she does not have to pay back the bridewealth.[citation needed]

* A man who divorces a woman of reproductive age must wait three months to ensure that she is not pregnant.[citation needed]

* Under certain circumstances (abuse, for instance), the wife may ask a judge to separate the couple.

* If a man divorces his wife three times, he can no longer marry her again unless she marries another man and then divorces him.[citation needed]

* These are guidelines; Islamic law on divorce is different depending on the school of thought.[6]

[edit] The penalty for theft

In accordance with the Qur'an and several hadith, theft is punished by imprisonment or amputation of hands or feet, depending on the number of times it was committed and depending on the item of theft.[5][6]

[edit] The penalty for adultery

Main article: Stoning to Death in Islam

In accordance with hadith, stoning to death is the penalty for married men and women who commit adultery.[7] For unmarried men and women, the punishment prescribed in the Qur'an and hadith is 100 lashes.[8]

[edit] The role of women under Sharia

Main article: women in Islam

This does not cite its references or sources.

Please help improve this article by introducing appropriate citations. (help, get involved!)

This article has been tagged since June 2006.

In terms of religious obligations, such as the daily prayers, payment of Zakat, observance of the Ramadan fast and pilgrimage, women are treated no differently from men. There are, however, some exceptions made in the case of prayers and fasting. Women are not obliged to fast during menstruation, pregnancy, for forty days after childbirth or while nursing if there could be any threat to her health or her baby's.

Much has been said about the slaves and Islam, it is pertinent to know that Islam has prescribed five ways to free slaves, has severely chastised those who enslave free persons and has thus regulated the slave trade. The source of slaves was restricted to war in preference to killing whole tribes, en masse, as was the tradition at the time. Islam in fact limited combat operations to combatants and forbade its followers from attacking men, women, children, the elderly, clergy, artisans and other workers not engaged in war.The Qur'an stresses upon 'freeing the slave' and there is not a single verse in the Qur'an that encourages the taking of slaves. Yet Islamic history is replete with examples of leaders taking horded of slaves from conquered peoples.

Islam has no clergy, but women may become religious scholars. In practice, it is much more common for men to be scholars than women. Early Muslim scholars such as Abu-Hanifa and Al-Tabary held that there is nothing wrong with women holding a post as responsible as that of judge. Many interpretations of Islamic law hold that women may not have prominent jobs, and thus are forbidden from working in the government. This has been a mainstream view in many Muslim nations in the last century, despite the example of Muhammad's wife Aisha, who both took part in politics and was a major authority on hadith. Islam does not prohibit women from working, as it says "Treat your women well and be kind to them for they are your partners and committed helpers."[9] Married women may seek employment although it is often thought in patriarchal societies that the woman's role as a wife and mother should have first priority.

Islam unequivocally allows both single and married women to own property in their own right. Islam restored to women the right to inherit property, in contrast with some cultures where women themselves are considered chattels that can be inherited. A woman's share of inheritance is completely hers and no one, including her father or husband, can make any claim on it. However, rich a woman may be, her male relatives in order of closeness are required to financially support her. It is her prerogative to forgive the male relatives their obligations of support.

According to Islamic Law, adult women cannot be forced to marry anyone without their consent. Besides all other provisions for her protection at the time of marriage, it was specifically decreed that a woman has the full right to her Mahr, a marriage gift, which is presented to her by her husband and is included in the nuptial contract. Like the man, however, the woman can divorce her husband without resorting to the courts, if the nuptial contract allows that. A Muslim may not marry or remain married to an unbeliever of either sex (2:221, 60:10). A Muslim man may marry a woman of the People of the Book (5:5); traditionally, however, Islamic law forbids a Muslim woman from marrying a non-Muslim man unless he converts to Islam.

In theory, Sunni Islamic law allows husbands to divorce their wives if there is a justifiable reason, by clearly saying talaq ("I divorce you") three times. The divorce becomes permanent if the couple has been divorced three times. In 2003, for example, a Malaysian court ruled that, under Sharia law, a man may divorce his wife via text messaging as long as the message was clear and unequivocal. [7] Such a divorce, known as the "triple talaq" is not allowed in most Muslim states. The divorced wife always keeps her dowry from when she was married, and is given child support and until the age of weaning, at which point the child may be returned to its father if it is deemed to be in its interests. The wife also receives spousal support as long as she remains single, and the sum of this is usually designated in the marriage contract, but can be varied by the courts according to need.

See also ma malakat aymanukum.

[edit] Dress codes

This article or section may contain original research or unverified claims.

Please help Wikipedia by adding references. See the talk page for details.

The Qur'an also places a dress code upon its followers. The rule for men has been ordained before the women: "say to the believing men to lower their gaze and preserve their modesty, it will make for greater purity for them and Allah is well aware of all that they do." Women are required to cover all of their body, except face and hands. Allah says in the Qur'an, "And say to the believing women that they cast down their looks and guard their private parts and do not display their ornaments except what appears thereof, and let them wear their khumūr over their bosoms, and not display their ornaments except to their husbands or their fathers, or their sons, . . ." (surat an-Nur verse 31). All those in whose presence a woman is not obliged to practice the dress code are known to be her mahrams. Men have a more relaxed dress code: the loins must be covered from knee to waist. The rationale given for these rules is that men and women are not to be viewed as sexual objects. Men are required to keep their guard up and women to protect themselves. In theory, should either one fail, the other prevents the society from falling into fitna (temptation or discord).

Turkey, a predominantly Muslim country, has controversial laws against these dress codes in schools and work places. After the declaration of the Republic in 1923, as part of revolutions brought by Atatürk, a modern dress code was encouraged. It is against the law to wear a head scarf while attending public school in Turkey,[10] as well as France, where the recently enacted rule caused huge public controversy.[11]

Some view Islamic women as being oppressed by the men in their communities because of the required dress codes. However, in more moderate nations, where these dress codes are not obligatory, there are still many Muslim women who practice it. Some choose to wear such clothes of their own free will because they believe it empowers women and discourages being viewed as sexual objects.

One of the garments some women wear is the hijāb (of which the headscarf is one component). The word hijab is derived from the Arabic word hajaba which means 'to hide from sight or view', 'to conceal'. Hijāb means to cover the head as well as the body.

[edit] Domestic punishments

Main article: Rights and obligations of spouses in Islam

For more details on the Islamic view of adultery, see Zina (sex).

The word in the Quran in 4:34 used for "beat" is "idreb". It is a conjugate of the word "daraba" which primarily means "to beat, strike, to hit" - Hans Wehr Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic, page 538. The Arabic word "idreb" is used in two primarily ways. 1) to strike up a poem, and 2) to physically "beat", or "strike" someone.

Some consider "hit" to be a misinterpretation, and believe it should be translated as "admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and separate from them." Certain modern translations of the Qur'an in the English language accept the commoner translation of "beat" but tone down the wording with bracketed additions. Whatever idribu¯hunna is meant to convey in the Qur'an -- and multiple, complementary meanings are quite common in Islam's holy book -- the verb is directed, not at a single husband, but to the community as a whole.

"idrib" is used 12 times in the Quran. Eight times it is used in the physical action of striking, and three times it is used in the context of speaking or applying a proverb.Clearly then, the most frequent use of the word is in physically striking.Here is a Quranic verse in which "idreb" is used:

8:12 - ""Strike" off their heads, "strike" off the very tips of their fingers!"

Several Hadith urge strongly against beating one's wife, such as: "How does anyone of you beat his wife as he beats the stallion camel and then embrace (sleep with) her? (Al-Bukhari, English Translation, vol. 8, Hadith 68, pp. 42-43), "I went to the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) and asked him: What do you say (command) about our wives? He replied: Give them food what you have for yourself, and clothe them by which you clothe yourself, and do not beat them, and do not revile them. (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 11, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Number 2139)". Others hadiths do indicate that husbands have a right to discipline their wives in a civilized manner to a certain extent:

Fear Allah concerning women! Verily you have taken them on the security of Allah, and intercourse with them has been made lawful unto you by words of Allah. You too have right over them, and that they should not allow anyone to sit on your bed whom you do not like. But if they do that, you can chastise them but not severely. Their rights upon you are that you should provide them with food and clothing in a fitting manner. (Narrated in Sahih Muslim, on the authority of Jabir.)

—[8]

According to Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, head of the European Council for Fatwa and Research:

If the husband senses that feelings of disobedience and rebelliousness are rising against him in his wife, he should try his best to rectify her attitude by kind words, gentle persuasion and reasoning with her. If this is not helpful, he should sleep apart from her, trying to awaken her agreeable feminine nature so that serenity may be restored, and she may respond to him in a harmonious fashion. If this approach fails, it is permissible for him to smack her lightly with his hands, avoiding her face and other sensitive parts. In no case should he resort to using a stick or any other instrument that might cause pain and injury.

Critics of the statement question what benefit smacking a women lightly may have? Or smacking strongly for that matter. Either the women submisses to her husband or leaves him.

Punishments are authorized by other passages in the Quran and Hadiths for certain crimes (e.g., extra-marital sex, adultery), and are employed by some as rationale for extra-legal punative action while others disagree (quotations provided by Syed Kamran Mirza):

Quran-24:2 "The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication—flog each of them with hundred stripes: Let no compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by God, if ye believe in God and the last day."

Quran-17:32 "Nor come nigh to adultery: for it is a shameful (deed) and an evil, opening the road (to other evils)."

[edit] Customs and behavioral laws

Practitioners of Islam are generally taught to follow some specific customs in their daily lives. Most of these customs can be traced back to Abrahamic traditions in Pre-Islamic Arabian society.[12] Due to Muhammad's sanction or tacit approval of such practices, these customs are considered to be Sunnah (practices of Muhammad as part of the religion) by the Ummah(Muslim nation). It includes customs like saying Bismillah (in the name of God) before eating and drinking[13] and then using the right hand for the purpose,[14] saying As-Salamu Alaykum (peace be upon you) when meeting someone and answering with Wa alaykumus-Salam (and peace be upon you),[15] saying Alhamdulillah (all gratitude is for only Allah) when sneezing and responding with Yarhamukallah (God have mercy on you),[16] and similarly saying the Adhan (prayer call) in the right ear of a newborn and the Iqama in his/her left. In the sphere of hygiene, it includes clipping the moustache, shaving the pubes, removing underarm hair, cutting nails, and circumcising the male offspring;[17][18] cleaning the nostrils, the mouth, and the teeth;[19] cleaning the body after urination and defecation,[20] and also abstention from sexual relations during the menstrual cycle and the puerperal discharge,[21] and ceremonial bath after the menstrual cycle, puerperal discharge, and Janabah (seminal/ovular discharge or sexual intercourse).[22] Burial rituals include funeral prayer[23] of bathed[24] and enshrouded dead body in coffin cloth[25] and burying it in a grave.[26]

[edit] Festivals

Main articles: Eid, Eid ul-Fitr, and Eid ul-Adha

There are two festivals that are considered Sunnah.[26][27]

1. Eid ul-Fitr

2. Eid ul-Adha

Rituals associated with these festivals are:[26]

* Sadaqah (charity) before Eid ul-Fitr prayer.[28]

* The Prayer and the Sermon on Eid day.

* Takbirs (glorifying God) after every prayer in the days of Tashriq (see footnote for def.)[29]

* Sacrifice of unflawed, four legged grazing animal of appropriate age after the prayer of Eid ul-Adha in the days of Tashriq.[30]

[edit] Dietary laws

Main article: Islamic dietary laws

Islamic law does not present a comprehensive list of pure foods and drinks. However, it sanctions:[31]

1. prohibition of swine, blood, meat of dead animals and animals slaughtered in the name of someone other than Allah.

2. slaughtering in the prescribed manner of tadhkiyah (cleansing) by taking Allah’s name.

3. prohibition of intoxicants

The prohibition of dead meat is not applicable to fish and locusts.[32][33][34] Also hadith literature prohibits beasts having sharp canine teeth, birds having claws and tentacles in their feet,[35] Jallalah(animals whose meat carries a stink in it because they feed on filth),[36] tamed donkeys,[37] and any piece cut from a living animal.[38][31]

[edit] Muslim apostates

Main article: Apostasy in Islam

In most interpretations of Sharia, conversion by Muslims to other religions, is strictly forbidden and is termed apostasy. Muslim theology equates apostasy to treason, and in most interpretations of sharia, the penalty for apostasy is death.

In many Muslim countries, the accusation of apostasy is even used against non-conventional interpretations of the Quran. The severe persecution of the famous expert in Arabic literature, Prof. Hamid Nasr Abu Zayd is an example of this. In some countries, Sunni and Shia Muslims often accuse each other of apostasy. The current civil strife in Iraq is explained by many in terms of the extremely harsh religious opposition between Sunnis and Shias in Iraq.

[edit] Illegal sexual relations: adultery, fornication, and homosexuality

Main article: Zina (sex)

Adultery is a crime and except in the case of rape, both man and woman are equally guilty. Thus it is said in Surah An-Noor (24th Chapter of the Quran): (24:2) "The woman and the man guilty of adultery, inflict on each of them one hundred lashes. Let not compassion move you in their case because it has been prescribed by Allah, if you believe in Allah and the life Hereafter (i.e. on the fact that since these are Allah's Commandments, their results are bound to appear forth) and let a party of the believers witness their punishment (so as to make sure that the punishment has been given according to Law)."

There are many references in the Qur'an which have been cited as referring to gay and lesbian behavior. Some obviously deal with effeminate men and "masculine women." Sura 4:20-21: "Against those of your women who commit adultery, call witnesses four in number from among yourselves; and if these bear witness, then keep the women in houses until death release them, or God shall make for them a way. And if two (men) of you commit it, then hurt them both; but if they turn again and amend, leave them alone, verily, God is easily turned, compassionate." Unmarried sex is permitted with slaves and captives of war (Quran 4:24), but the captive women must consent to marriage if the Muslim man wishes to marry her.

Some translations of the Qur'an call for the long-term or permanent house arrest of women guilty of adultery -- they are to be confined to "houses of death." An accurate translation is that their husband (or their parent or guardian) is to keep them -- not abandon them. Also, if they repent of their sin, God will accept their repentance. A woman can only be found guilty if four witnesses testify against her. Verse 21 seems to call for physical punishment for men who engage in same-sex activity, followed by their release if they abandon the practice. Verse 24:2 calls for a man or woman guilty of adultery or fornication to be flogged 100 times.

Homosexuality, moreover, is considered a grave sin. In Hadith, Muhammad clarifies the gravity of this by saying: "Allah curses the one who does the actions (homosexual practices) of the people of Lut," repeating it three times; saying in another Hadith: "If a man comes upon a man then they are both adulterers." Here, he considered homosexuality tantamount to adultery in relation to the Shari’ah punishments because it is an abomination on the one hand, and the definition of adultery applies to it on the other hand.....As for lesbians, Muhammad said about them: "If a woman comes upon a woman, they are both adulteresses." The homosexual receives the same punishment as an adulterer. This means, that if the homosexual is married, he/she is stoned to death, while if single, he/she is whipped 100 times.

International controversy came about when two gay teenagers were publicly executed (following lashings in prison) in Iran, July nineteenth 2005, for homosexual relations. The youths were hanged in Edalat Square in the city of Mashhad, in north east Iran. The youths were believed to have been sixteen years old at the time they had had relations. Under the Iranian penal code, girls as young as nine and boys as young as 15 can be hanged. Three other boys have gone into hiding due to the incident. Gay men have been publically executed in Saudi Arabia, where beheading is the primary method, and in Taliban Afghanistan, where men were crushed with large boulders. It's debated how many gay men have been executed in Saudi Arabia, with some estimates placing the number of executions in the thousands in the last fifteen years, and other estimates are much smaller. Critics have noted that, in countries where it is mortally illegal to be homosexual, that men are accused of homosexuality for political reasons. This accusation has been made regarding Nigeria, as well as countries in the Middle East. It has also been suggested that there is dissonance between the capital illegality of homosexuality in many Muslim nations and the frequency of homosexual sex and desire for it, and that arrests and executions are done primarily for political reasons. The Iranian teens argued that they didn't deserve to die, because homosexual sex was common among the boys they know and they didn't know it was illegal.

[edit] Freedom of speech

See also: Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy

See also: Blasphemy laws of the Islamic Republic of Iran and Blasphemy laws of Pakistan

Sharia does not allow freedom of speech on such matters as criticism of Muhammad. Such criticism is considered blasphemy against Muhammad.

The Qur'an says that Allah curses the one who harms the Prophet in this world and He connected harm of Himself to harm of the Prophet. There is no dispute that anyone who curses Allah is killed and that his curse demands that he be categorized as an unbeliever. The Judgment of the unbeliever is that he is killed. [...] There is a difference between ... harming Allah and His Messenger and harming the believers. Injuring the believers, short of murder, incurs beating and exemplary punishment. The judgement against those who harm Allah and His Prophet is more severe -- the death penalty.

—[39]

In Egypt, public authorities annulled, without his consent, the marriage of Prof. Nasr Abu Zayd when he got in conflict with an orthodox Islamic cleric from the Al-Azhar University in Cairo. The cleric had condemned Abu Zayd's reading of the Qur'an as being against the orthodox interpretation and labelled him an apostate (seen as a non-believer and consequently not permitted to marry or stay married to a Muslim woman). Abu Zayd fled to the Netherlands, where he is now a professor at the university of Leiden.

[edit] Treatment of non-Muslims

The neutrality of this section is disputed.

Please see the discussion on the talk page.

Under Sharia law non-muslims may be subjected to Sharia Laws however it codifies the treatment of dhimmis (Arabic) and rayahs (Turkish) in relation to the Muslim state and in cases of over-lapping jurisdiction. Dhimmis are distinctly second-class citizens in that they cannot serve in public office, cannot testify in court and must follow certain rules meant for their humiliation (such as paying the jizya). The jizya or tax is enforced on those who broke a treaty or attacked Muslim with no right (as a punishment) or required from those who ask for protection without enrolling in the army. The rules include privilege to practice their own religion, except for public demonstration of non-muslim religious practices and the right to convert muslims (denied, but the reverse is allowed).

The core component of treatment is the jizya, or tax specifically upon non-Muslims. The jizya originates in the Koran [9:29], which says "Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger and those who acknowledge not the religion of the truth among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." The "Book" refers to the People of the Book, Jews and Christians, who don't follow their religion righteously, but the jizya was extended to all conquered non-Muslims. The jizya ultimately is less than the Zakah (money given to the poor and needy) and Sadaqah (charity) that Muslims give. In practice, this was rarely the case.

In addition, Dhimmis are forbidden to build or repair churches or synagogues. Bells, crosses, sacred books and other public demonstrations of religion, including laments at funerals, are forbidden. For example, churches and ancient gurdwaras in present day Pakistan, have been preserved and the minorities live in sizeable numbers in the Guru-Nanak pura and Karachi.

[edit] Sharia, democracy and human rights

Many democrats, and several official institutions in democratic countries (as the European Court for Human Rights) are convinced that Sharia is incompatible with a democratic state. These incompatibilities have been clarified in several legal disputes.

In 1998 the Turkish Constitutional Court banned and dissolved Turkey's Refah Party on the grounds that the "rules of sharia", which Refah sought to introduce, "were incompatible with the democratic regime," stating that "Democracy is the antithesis of sharia." On appeal by Refah the European Court of Human Rights determined that "sharia is incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy"[40][41][42] Refah's sharia based notion of a "plurality of legal systems, grounded on religion" was ruled to contravene the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. It was determined that it would "do away with the State's role as the guarantor of individual rights and freedoms" and "infringe the principle of non-discrimination between individuals as regards their enjoyment of public freedoms, which is one of the fundamental principles of democracy". It was further ruled that

[T]he Court considers that sharia, which faithfully reflects the dogmas and divine rules laid down by religion, is stable and invariable. Principles such as pluralism in the political sphere or the constant evolution of public freedoms have no place in it. […] It is difficult to declare one’s respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia, which clearly diverges from Convention values, particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervenes in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts.

—[43]

On the other side, legal scholar L. Ali Khan concludes "that constitutional orders founded on the principles of Sharia are fully compatible with democracy, provided that religious minorities are protected and the incumbent Islamic leadership remains committed to the right to recall".[44][45] However, Christian Pippan argues, that this contradicts the political reality in most Islamic states. "While constitutional arrangements to ensure that political authority is exercised within the boundaries of Sharia vary greatly among those nations",[46] most existing models of political Islam have so far grossly failed to accept any meaningful political competition of the kind that Khan himself has identified as essential for even a limited conception of democracy. Khan, writes Pippan, dismisses verdicts as from the European Court of Human Rights or the Turkish Constitutional Court "as an expression of purely national or regional preferences."[47]

Several major, predominantly Muslim countries criticized the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) for its perceived failure to take into account the cultural and religious context of non-Western countries. Iran claimed that the UDHR was a "a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition", which could not be implemented by Muslims without trespassing the Islamic law. Therefore the Organization of the Islamic Conference adopted the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which diverges from the UDHR substantially, affirming Sharia as the sole source of human rights. This Declaration was severely criticized by the International Commission of Jurists for allegedly gravely threatening the inter-cultural consensus, introducing intolerable discriminatio

Strike · January 9, 2007

Well, namely, this: Verses in the Koran must always be understood within the context of the ultimate goal of Islam. Allah sent Mohammad (and his followers) to conquer all other religions (9:33, 48:28, 61:9). To achieve this ultimate goal of vanquishing disbelief, Muslims must convert, subjugate, or kill all non-Muslims until all religion is for Allah (2:193, 8:39; also see 9:5 and 9:29; also see [4]). This must always be kept in mind. This ultimate goal is the context which contains and overrides all contexts in Islam. If killing a non-Muslim is necessary for the advancement or the defence of Islam, then it must be done.

Also, not picking up blind people with seeing eye dogs because its against their "faith" and refusing to pick up anyone in the posession of alcohol. Insanity.

Islam is inherently incompatible with our democracy, or any government with any respect for human life and dignity.

Here is a little more for you , this is Sharia law, every muslim in the entire world, "moderate" or not would be dancing and shooting in the streets if this were passed tomorrow in the US. Enjoy.

Laws and practices under Sharia

[edit] Marriage laws

* The Muslim man who is not currently a fornicator can only marry a Muslim woman who is not currently a fornicatress or a chaste woman from the people of the book.

* The Muslim fornicator can only marry a Muslim fornicatress.

* The number of wives is limited to one. In times where there the population of men is smaller than normal, such as times of war, up to four wives can be taken, but only if they are treated equally and with the consent of the first wife.

* The Muslim woman who is not currently a fornicatress can only marry a Muslim man who is not currently a fornicator.

* The Muslim fornicatress can only marry a Muslim fornicator.

* The woman cannot marry without the consent of her guardian. If she marries, her husband becomes her new guardian.

* The guardian may choose a suitable partner for a virgin girl, but the girl is free to contest and has the right to say 'no'.

* The guardian cannot marry the divorced woman or the widow if she didn't ask to be married.

* The number of husbands is limited to one.

* "Do not marry unless you give your wife something that is her right." It is obligatory for a man to give bride wealth (gift)to the woman he marries.[5]

o He is also not allowed to intercourse in front of his sons if they are present in the room.

[edit] Divorce laws

* A woman who wishes to be divorced needs the consent of her husband. If he consents she does not have to pay back the bridewealth.[citation needed]

* A man who divorces a woman of reproductive age must wait three months to ensure that she is not pregnant.[citation needed]

* Under certain circumstances (abuse, for instance), the wife may ask a judge to separate the couple.

* If a man divorces his wife three times, he can no longer marry her again unless she marries another man and then divorces him.[citation needed]

* These are guidelines; Islamic law on divorce is different depending on the school of thought.[6]

[edit] The penalty for theft

In accordance with the Qur'an and several hadith, theft is punished by imprisonment or amputation of hands or feet, depending on the number of times it was committed and depending on the item of theft.[5][6]

[edit] The penalty for adultery

Main article: Stoning to Death in Islam

In accordance with hadith, stoning to death is the penalty for married men and women who commit adultery.[7] For unmarried men and women, the punishment prescribed in the Qur'an and hadith is 100 lashes.[8]

[edit] The role of women under Sharia

Main article: women in Islam

This does not cite its references or sources.

Please help improve this article by introducing appropriate citations. (help, get involved!)

This article has been tagged since June 2006.

In terms of religious obligations, such as the daily prayers, payment of Zakat, observance of the Ramadan fast and pilgrimage, women are treated no differently from men. There are, however, some exceptions made in the case of prayers and fasting. Women are not obliged to fast during menstruation, pregnancy, for forty days after childbirth or while nursing if there could be any threat to her health or her baby's.

Much has been said about the slaves and Islam, it is pertinent to know that Islam has prescribed five ways to free slaves, has severely chastised those who enslave free persons and has thus regulated the slave trade. The source of slaves was restricted to war in preference to killing whole tribes, en masse, as was the tradition at the time. Islam in fact limited combat operations to combatants and forbade its followers from attacking men, women, children, the elderly, clergy, artisans and other workers not engaged in war.The Qur'an stresses upon 'freeing the slave' and there is not a single verse in the Qur'an that encourages the taking of slaves. Yet Islamic history is replete with examples of leaders taking horded of slaves from conquered peoples.

Islam has no clergy, but women may become religious scholars. In practice, it is much more common for men to be scholars than women. Early Muslim scholars such as Abu-Hanifa and Al-Tabary held that there is nothing wrong with women holding a post as responsible as that of judge. Many interpretations of Islamic law hold that women may not have prominent jobs, and thus are forbidden from working in the government. This has been a mainstream view in many Muslim nations in the last century, despite the example of Muhammad's wife Aisha, who both took part in politics and was a major authority on hadith. Islam does not prohibit women from working, as it says "Treat your women well and be kind to them for they are your partners and committed helpers."[9] Married women may seek employment although it is often thought in patriarchal societies that the woman's role as a wife and mother should have first priority.

Islam unequivocally allows both single and married women to own property in their own right. Islam restored to women the right to inherit property, in contrast with some cultures where women themselves are considered chattels that can be inherited. A woman's share of inheritance is completely hers and no one, including her father or husband, can make any claim on it. However, rich a woman may be, her male relatives in order of closeness are required to financially support her. It is her prerogative to forgive the male relatives their obligations of support.

According to Islamic Law, adult women cannot be forced to marry anyone without their consent. Besides all other provisions for her protection at the time of marriage, it was specifically decreed that a woman has the full right to her Mahr, a marriage gift, which is presented to her by her husband and is included in the nuptial contract. Like the man, however, the woman can divorce her husband without resorting to the courts, if the nuptial contract allows that. A Muslim may not marry or remain married to an unbeliever of either sex (2:221, 60:10). A Muslim man may marry a woman of the People of the Book (5:5); traditionally, however, Islamic law forbids a Muslim woman from marrying a non-Muslim man unless he converts to Islam.

In theory, Sunni Islamic law allows husbands to divorce their wives if there is a justifiable reason, by clearly saying talaq ("I divorce you") three times. The divorce becomes permanent if the couple has been divorced three times. In 2003, for example, a Malaysian court ruled that, under Sharia law, a man may divorce his wife via text messaging as long as the message was clear and unequivocal. [7] Such a divorce, known as the "triple talaq" is not allowed in most Muslim states. The divorced wife always keeps her dowry from when she was married, and is given child support and until the age of weaning, at which point the child may be returned to its father if it is deemed to be in its interests. The wife also receives spousal support as long as she remains single, and the sum of this is usually designated in the marriage contract, but can be varied by the courts according to need.

See also ma malakat aymanukum.

[edit] Dress codes

This article or section may contain original research or unverified claims.

Please help Wikipedia by adding references. See the talk page for details.

The Qur'an also places a dress code upon its followers. The rule for men has been ordained before the women: "say to the believing men to lower their gaze and preserve their modesty, it will make for greater purity for them and Allah is well aware of all that they do." Women are required to cover all of their body, except face and hands. Allah says in the Qur'an, "And say to the believing women that they cast down their looks and guard their private parts and do not display their ornaments except what appears thereof, and let them wear their khumūr over their bosoms, and not display their ornaments except to their husbands or their fathers, or their sons, . . ." (surat an-Nur verse 31). All those in whose presence a woman is not obliged to practice the dress code are known to be her mahrams. Men have a more relaxed dress code: the loins must be covered from knee to waist. The rationale given for these rules is that men and women are not to be viewed as sexual objects. Men are required to keep their guard up and women to protect themselves. In theory, should either one fail, the other prevents the society from falling into fitna (temptation or discord).

Turkey, a predominantly Muslim country, has controversial laws against these dress codes in schools and work places. After the declaration of the Republic in 1923, as part of revolutions brought by Atatürk, a modern dress code was encouraged. It is against the law to wear a head scarf while attending public school in Turkey,[10] as well as France, where the recently enacted rule caused huge public controversy.[11]

Some view Islamic women as being oppressed by the men in their communities because of the required dress codes. However, in more moderate nations, where these dress codes are not obligatory, there are still many Muslim women who practice it. Some choose to wear such clothes of their own free will because they believe it empowers women and discourages being viewed as sexual objects.

One of the garments some women wear is the hijāb (of which the headscarf is one component). The word hijab is derived from the Arabic word hajaba which means 'to hide from sight or view', 'to conceal'. Hijāb means to cover the head as well as the body.

[edit] Domestic punishments

Main article: Rights and obligations of spouses in Islam

For more details on the Islamic view of adultery, see Zina (sex).

The word in the Quran in 4:34 used for "beat" is "idreb". It is a conjugate of the word "daraba" which primarily means "to beat, strike, to hit" - Hans Wehr Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic, page 538. The Arabic word "idreb" is used in two primarily ways. 1) to strike up a poem, and 2) to physically "beat", or "strike" someone.

Some consider "hit" to be a misinterpretation, and believe it should be translated as "admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and separate from them." Certain modern translations of the Qur'an in the English language accept the commoner translation of "beat" but tone down the wording with bracketed additions. Whatever idribu¯hunna is meant to convey in the Qur'an -- and multiple, complementary meanings are quite common in Islam's holy book -- the verb is directed, not at a single husband, but to the community as a whole.

"idrib" is used 12 times in the Quran. Eight times it is used in the physical action of striking, and three times it is used in the context of speaking or applying a proverb.Clearly then, the most frequent use of the word is in physically striking.Here is a Quranic verse in which "idreb" is used:

8:12 - ""Strike" off their heads, "strike" off the very tips of their fingers!"

Several Hadith urge strongly against beating one's wife, such as: "How does anyone of you beat his wife as he beats the stallion camel and then embrace (sleep with) her? (Al-Bukhari, English Translation, vol. 8, Hadith 68, pp. 42-43), "I went to the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) and asked him: What do you say (command) about our wives? He replied: Give them food what you have for yourself, and clothe them by which you clothe yourself, and do not beat them, and do not revile them. (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 11, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Number 2139)". Others hadiths do indicate that husbands have a right to discipline their wives in a civilized manner to a certain extent:

Fear Allah concerning women! Verily you have taken them on the security of Allah, and intercourse with them has been made lawful unto you by words of Allah. You too have right over them, and that they should not allow anyone to sit on your bed whom you do not like. But if they do that, you can chastise them but not severely. Their rights upon you are that you should provide them with food and clothing in a fitting manner. (Narrated in Sahih Muslim, on the authority of Jabir.)

—[8]

According to Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, head of the European Council for Fatwa and Research:

If the husband senses that feelings of disobedience and rebelliousness are rising against him in his wife, he should try his best to rectify her attitude by kind words, gentle persuasion and reasoning with her. If this is not helpful, he should sleep apart from her, trying to awaken her agreeable feminine nature so that serenity may be restored, and she may respond to him in a harmonious fashion. If this approach fails, it is permissible for him to smack her lightly with his hands, avoiding her face and other sensitive parts. In no case should he resort to using a stick or any other instrument that might cause pain and injury.

Critics of the statement question what benefit smacking a women lightly may have? Or smacking strongly for that matter. Either the women submisses to her husband or leaves him.

Punishments are authorized by other passages in the Quran and Hadiths for certain crimes (e.g., extra-marital sex, adultery), and are employed by some as rationale for extra-legal punative action while others disagree (quotations provided by Syed Kamran Mirza):

Quran-24:2 "The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication—flog each of them with hundred stripes: Let no compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by God, if ye believe in God and the last day."

Quran-17:32 "Nor come nigh to adultery: for it is a shameful (deed) and an evil, opening the road (to other evils)."

[edit] Customs and behavioral laws

Practitioners of Islam are generally taught to follow some specific customs in their daily lives. Most of these customs can be traced back to Abrahamic traditions in Pre-Islamic Arabian society.[12] Due to Muhammad's sanction or tacit approval of such practices, these customs are considered to be Sunnah (practices of Muhammad as part of the religion) by the Ummah(Muslim nation). It includes customs like saying Bismillah (in the name of God) before eating and drinking[13] and then using the right hand for the purpose,[14] saying As-Salamu Alaykum (peace be upon you) when meeting someone and answering with Wa alaykumus-Salam (and peace be upon you),[15] saying Alhamdulillah (all gratitude is for only Allah) when sneezing and responding with Yarhamukallah (God have mercy on you),[16] and similarly saying the Adhan (prayer call) in the right ear of a newborn and the Iqama in his/her left. In the sphere of hygiene, it includes clipping the moustache, shaving the pubes, removing underarm hair, cutting nails, and circumcising the male offspring;[17][18] cleaning the nostrils, the mouth, and the teeth;[19] cleaning the body after urination and defecation,[20] and also abstention from sexual relations during the menstrual cycle and the puerperal discharge,[21] and ceremonial bath after the menstrual cycle, puerperal discharge, and Janabah (seminal/ovular discharge or sexual intercourse).[22] Burial rituals include funeral prayer[23] of bathed[24] and enshrouded dead body in coffin cloth[25] and burying it in a grave.[26]

[edit] Festivals

Main articles: Eid, Eid ul-Fitr, and Eid ul-Adha

There are two festivals that are considered Sunnah.[26][27]

1. Eid ul-Fitr

2. Eid ul-Adha

Rituals associated with these festivals are:[26]

* Sadaqah (charity) before Eid ul-Fitr prayer.[28]

* The Prayer and the Sermon on Eid day.

* Takbirs (glorifying God) after every prayer in the days of Tashriq (see footnote for def.)[29]

* Sacrifice of unflawed, four legged grazing animal of appropriate age after the prayer of Eid ul-Adha in the days of Tashriq.[30]

[edit] Dietary laws

Main article: Islamic dietary laws

Islamic law does not present a comprehensive list of pure foods and drinks. However, it sanctions:[31]

1. prohibition of swine, blood, meat of dead animals and animals slaughtered in the name of someone other than Allah.

2. slaughtering in the prescribed manner of tadhkiyah (cleansing) by taking Allah’s name.

3. prohibition of intoxicants

The prohibition of dead meat is not applicable to fish and locusts.[32][33][34] Also hadith literature prohibits beasts having sharp canine teeth, birds having claws and tentacles in their feet,[35] Jallalah(animals whose meat carries a stink in it because they feed on filth),[36] tamed donkeys,[37] and any piece cut from a living animal.[38][31]

[edit] Muslim apostates

Main article: Apostasy in Islam

In most interpretations of Sharia, conversion by Muslims to other religions, is strictly forbidden and is termed apostasy. Muslim theology equates apostasy to treason, and in most interpretations of sharia, the penalty for apostasy is death.

In many Muslim countries, the accusation of apostasy is even used against non-conventional interpretations of the Quran. The severe persecution of the famous expert in Arabic literature, Prof. Hamid Nasr Abu Zayd is an example of this. In some countries, Sunni and Shia Muslims often accuse each other of apostasy. The current civil strife in Iraq is explained by many in terms of the extremely harsh religious opposition between Sunnis and Shias in Iraq.

[edit] Illegal sexual relations: adultery, fornication, and homosexuality

Main article: Zina (sex)

Adultery is a crime and except in the case of rape, both man and woman are equally guilty. Thus it is said in Surah An-Noor (24th Chapter of the Quran): (24:2) "The woman and the man guilty of adultery, inflict on each of them one hundred lashes. Let not compassion move you in their case because it has been prescribed by Allah, if you believe in Allah and the life Hereafter (i.e. on the fact that since these are Allah's Commandments, their results are bound to appear forth) and let a party of the believers witness their punishment (so as to make sure that the punishment has been given according to Law)."

There are many references in the Qur'an which have been cited as referring to gay and lesbian behavior. Some obviously deal with effeminate men and "masculine women." Sura 4:20-21: "Against those of your women who commit adultery, call witnesses four in number from among yourselves; and if these bear witness, then keep the women in houses until death release them, or God shall make for them a way. And if two (men) of you commit it, then hurt them both; but if they turn again and amend, leave them alone, verily, God is easily turned, compassionate." Unmarried sex is permitted with slaves and captives of war (Quran 4:24), but the captive women must consent to marriage if the Muslim man wishes to marry her.

Some translations of the Qur'an call for the long-term or permanent house arrest of women guilty of adultery -- they are to be confined to "houses of death." An accurate translation is that their husband (or their parent or guardian) is to keep them -- not abandon them. Also, if they repent of their sin, God will accept their repentance. A woman can only be found guilty if four witnesses testify against her. Verse 21 seems to call for physical punishment for men who engage in same-sex activity, followed by their release if they abandon the practice. Verse 24:2 calls for a man or woman guilty of adultery or fornication to be flogged 100 times.

Homosexuality, moreover, is considered a grave sin. In Hadith, Muhammad clarifies the gravity of this by saying: "Allah curses the one who does the actions (homosexual practices) of the people of Lut," repeating it three times; saying in another Hadith: "If a man comes upon a man then they are both adulterers." Here, he considered homosexuality tantamount to adultery in relation to the Shari’ah punishments because it is an abomination on the one hand, and the definition of adultery applies to it on the other hand.....As for lesbians, Muhammad said about them: "If a woman comes upon a woman, they are both adulteresses." The homosexual receives the same punishment as an adulterer. This means, that if the homosexual is married, he/she is stoned to death, while if single, he/she is whipped 100 times.

International controversy came about when two gay teenagers were publicly executed (following lashings in prison) in Iran, July nineteenth 2005, for homosexual relations. The youths were hanged in Edalat Square in the city of Mashhad, in north east Iran. The youths were believed to have been sixteen years old at the time they had had relations. Under the Iranian penal code, girls as young as nine and boys as young as 15 can be hanged. Three other boys have gone into hiding due to the incident. Gay men have been publically executed in Saudi Arabia, where beheading is the primary method, and in Taliban Afghanistan, where men were crushed with large boulders. It's debated how many gay men have been executed in Saudi Arabia, with some estimates placing the number of executions in the thousands in the last fifteen years, and other estimates are much smaller. Critics have noted that, in countries where it is mortally illegal to be homosexual, that men are accused of homosexuality for political reasons. This accusation has been made regarding Nigeria, as well as countries in the Middle East. It has also been suggested that there is dissonance between the capital illegality of homosexuality in many Muslim nations and the frequency of homosexual sex and desire for it, and that arrests and executions are done primarily for political reasons. The Iranian teens argued that they didn't deserve to die, because homosexual sex was common among the boys they know and they didn't know it was illegal.

[edit] Freedom of speech

See also: Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy

See also: Blasphemy laws of the Islamic Republic of Iran and Blasphemy laws of Pakistan

Sharia does not allow freedom of speech on such matters as criticism of Muhammad. Such criticism is considered blasphemy against Muhammad.

The Qur'an says that Allah curses the one who harms the Prophet in this world and He connected harm of Himself to harm of the Prophet. There is no dispute that anyone who curses Allah is killed and that his curse demands that he be categorized as an unbeliever. The Judgment of the unbeliever is that he is killed. [...] There is a difference between ... harming Allah and His Messenger and harming the believers. Injuring the believers, short of murder, incurs beating and exemplary punishment. The judgement against those who harm Allah and His Prophet is more severe -- the death penalty.

—[39]

In Egypt, public authorities annulled, without his consent, the marriage of Prof. Nasr Abu Zayd when he got in conflict with an orthodox Islamic cleric from the Al-Azhar University in Cairo. The cleric had condemned Abu Zayd's reading of the Qur'an as being against the orthodox interpretation and labelled him an apostate (seen as a non-believer and consequently not permitted to marry or stay married to a Muslim woman). Abu Zayd fled to the Netherlands, where he is now a professor at the university of Leiden.

[edit] Treatment of non-Muslims

The neutrality of this section is disputed.

Please see the discussion on the talk page.

Under Sharia law non-muslims may be subjected to Sharia Laws however it codifies the treatment of dhimmis (Arabic) and rayahs (Turkish) in relation to the Muslim state and in cases of over-lapping jurisdiction. Dhimmis are distinctly second-class citizens in that they cannot serve in public office, cannot testify in court and must follow certain rules meant for their humiliation (such as paying the jizya). The jizya or tax is enforced on those who broke a treaty or attacked Muslim with no right (as a punishment) or required from those who ask for protection without enrolling in the army. The rules include privilege to practice their own religion, except for public demonstration of non-muslim religious practices and the right to convert muslims (denied, but the reverse is allowed).

The core component of treatment is the jizya, or tax specifically upon non-Muslims. The jizya originates in the Koran [9:29], which says "Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger and those who acknowledge not the religion of the truth among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." The "Book" refers to the People of the Book, Jews and Christians, who don't follow their religion righteously, but the jizya was extended to all conquered non-Muslims. The jizya ultimately is less than the Zakah (money given to the poor and needy) and Sadaqah (charity) that Muslims give. In practice, this was rarely the case.

In addition, Dhimmis are forbidden to build or repair churches or synagogues. Bells, crosses, sacred books and other public demonstrations of religion, including laments at funerals, are forbidden. For example, churches and ancient gurdwaras in present day Pakistan, have been preserved and the minorities live in sizeable numbers in the Guru-Nanak pura and Karachi.

[edit] Sharia, democracy and human rights

Many democrats, and several official institutions in democratic countries (as the European Court for Human Rights) are convinced that Sharia is incompatible with a democratic state. These incompatibilities have been clarified in several legal disputes.

In 1998 the Turkish Constitutional Court banned and dissolved Turkey's Refah Party on the grounds that the "rules of sharia", which Refah sought to introduce, "were incompatible with the democratic regime," stating that "Democracy is the antithesis of sharia." On appeal by Refah the European Court of Human Rights determined that "sharia is incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy"[40][41][42] Refah's sharia based notion of a "plurality of legal systems, grounded on religion" was ruled to contravene the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. It was determined that it would "do away with the State's role as the guarantor of individual rights and freedoms" and "infringe the principle of non-discrimination between individuals as regards their enjoyment of public freedoms, which is one of the fundamental principles of democracy". It was further ruled that

[T]he Court considers that sharia, which faithfully reflects the dogmas and divine rules laid down by religion, is stable and invariable. Principles such as pluralism in the political sphere or the constant evolution of public freedoms have no place in it. […] It is difficult to declare one’s respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia, which clearly diverges from Convention values, particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervenes in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts.

—[43]

On the other side, legal scholar L. Ali Khan concludes "that constitutional orders founded on the principles of Sharia are fully compatible with democracy, provided that religious minorities are protected and the incumbent Islamic leadership remains committed to the right to recall".[44][45] However, Christian Pippan argues, that this contradicts the political reality in most Islamic states. "While constitutional arrangements to ensure that political authority is exercised within the boundaries of Sharia vary greatly among those nations",[46] most existing models of political Islam have so far grossly failed to accept any meaningful political competition of the kind that Khan himself has identified as essential for even a limited conception of democracy. Khan, writes Pippan, dismisses verdicts as from the European Court of Human Rights or the Turkish Constitutional Court "as an expression of purely national or regional preferences."[47]

Several major, predominantly Muslim countries criticized the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) for its perceived failure to take into account the cultural and religious context of non-Western countries. Iran claimed that the UDHR was a "a secular understanding of the Judeo-Christian tradition", which could not be implemented by Muslims without trespassing the Islamic law. Therefore the Organization of the Islamic Conference adopted the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam, which diverges from the UDHR substantially, affirming Sharia as the sole source of human rights. This Declaration was severely criticized by the International Commission of Jurists for allegedly gravely threatening the inter-cultural consensus, introducing intolerable discriminatio

That's a lot of words :dunno:

Boz/BoFan · January 9, 2007

That's a lot of words

I'll sum it up. 9/11.

parrot · January 9, 2007

That's a lot of words

:dunno:

I'm still confused as to what I'm supposed to do... :blink:

Strike · January 9, 2007

I'll sum it up. 9/11.

Oh, why didn't you just say so. In that case, shoot 'em all :dunno:

Boz/BoFan · January 9, 2007

I'm still confused as to what I'm supposed to do...

Coming from a guy who who has an L and an R painted on the tips of his shoes that does not surprise me.

Peens · January 9, 2007

We just need to be MORE understanding and tolerant of there culture is all. Then we all could live in peace.

lol :dunno:

Boz/BoFan · January 9, 2007

Oh, why didn't you just say so. In that case, shoot 'em all

Yeah, thats what i said. Its people like you who cant handle the truth and lob these little elitest quips that make the situation worse. Just sit back and enjoy the show, you'll get me sooner or later.

Strike · January 9, 2007

Yeah, thats what i said. Its people like you who cant handle the truth and lob these little elitest quips that make the situation worse. Just sit back and enjoy the show, you'll get me sooner or later.

I made the situation worse? Did we just get attacked again? Can we call it 01/09 this time? :dunno:

parrot · January 9, 2007

Coming from a guy who who has an L and an R painted on the tips of his shoes that does not surprise me.

POW!

You really got me there. I can see why your were dissing someone else's comedy stylings earlier. :dunno:

I understand we need to defend our American ideals and as such it's time to put an end to all this "tolerance" and "freedom" rigamaro, but I just don't know where to start and was hoping for some tips. I guess this is the thanks a guy gets for trying to get find out just what he needs to do to be a good citizen? :dunno:

DanXIII · January 9, 2007

/Boz/BoFan casts Wall of Text +4 for 300 hps

/You are blinded.

:dunno:

Peens · January 9, 2007

I made the situation worse? Did we just get attacked again? Can we call it 01/09 this time?

I agree with Strike here. I say we just give in and give them what they want which is well, the world. We could all live by there rules and look what it would do to the crime rate here? no one would even think about stealing for fear of getting his hand chopped off without a trial. No need to worry about the wife cheating on you either, Ive never met anyone that wants big boulders being thrown at there skull.

We can tear down our evil building and live in clay huts and raise sheep and $HIT. Doesnt that sound like a focking hoot or what? That would just be the ultimate sign of tolerance and how we LOVE diversity. Boy, I feel very liberal today. I might have to fantasize about Pelosi now.

lol

Strike · January 9, 2007

I agree with Strike here. I say we just give in and give them what they want which is well, the world. We could all live by there rules and look what it would do to the crime rate here? no one would even think about stealing for fear of getting his hand chopped off without a trial. No need to worry about the wife cheating on you either, Ive never met anyone that wants big boulders being thrown at there skull.

We can tear down our evil building and live in clay huts and raise sheep and $HIT. Doesnt that sound like a focking hoot or what? That would just be the ultimate sign of tolerance and how we LOVE diversity. Boy, I feel very liberal today. I might have to fantasize about Pelosi now.

lol

Yes, this is exactly what I said. Right after I said to shoot them. :dunno:

Boz/BoFan · January 9, 2007

POW!

You really got me there. I can see why your were dissing someone else's comedy stylings earlier.

I understand we need to defend our American ideals and as such it's time to put an end to all this "tolerance" and "freedom" rigamaro, but I just don't know where to start and was hoping for some tips. I guess this is the thanks a guy gets for trying to get find out just what he needs to do to be a good citizen?

You cant distinguish between an insult and comedy. Shocker.

davebg · January 9, 2007

I understand we need to defend our American ideals and as such it's time to put an end to all this "tolerance" and "freedom" rigamaro, but I just don't know where to start and was hoping for some tips.

I'll play.

The first thing that we need to do is get rid of this asinine policy of multiculturalism that seemingly took over in the 90's. The idea of preserving one's cultural identity at the expense of the culture that you live in is, IMO, a HUGE problem.

This country was built upon immigration and the diversity that it brought. While there was no shortage of people trying to keep their roots alive, they also branched out and wanted their flowers to bloom as an American. When you talk to older generations who immigrated to the US they usually will regale you with stories about how they and their parents wanted to be Americans w/all of the fiber in their being. They didn't say they wanted to be Italian Americans or Irish Americans or (in this case) Muslim Americans...they just wanted to be Americans. They realized that to do so was not tantamount to brushing aside their history, culture and affiliation to where they came from.

Multiculturalism did away with all of that. Instead of celebrating your new home...instead of assimilating into your new culture the emphasis has been put on fighting those very concepts so as to not "lose" one's sense of where they came from.

wiffleball · January 9, 2007

I'm still confused as to what I'm supposed to do...

I think you're forgetting an important point here. Boz/RP/FF/GoColts don't have any actual independent thought - Their schtick is to cut and paste whatever talking points Rush/Fox/etc gives them. You're dipping into a dry hole my frined.

parrot · January 9, 2007

You cant distinguish between an insult and comedy. Shocker.

Maybe because from either perspective it was so focking weak...? :dunno:

Why don't you answer the focking question? What is it you are advocating? Are there some specific actions you would like to see American citizens and/or government take, or will just developing a good healthy general hatred of all Muslims suffice? I'm curious to know where we're heading here.

Strike · January 9, 2007

I'll play.

The first thing that we need to do is get rid of this asinine policy of multiculturalism that seemingly took over in the 90's. The idea of preserving one's cultural identity at the expense of the culture that you live in is, IMO, a HUGE problem.

This country was built upon immigration and the diversity that it brought. While there was no shortage of people trying to keep their roots alive, they also branched out and wanted their flowers to bloom as an American. When you talk to older generations who immigrated to the US they usually will regale you with stories about how they and their parents wanted to be Americans w/all of the fiber in their being. They didn't say they wanted to be Italian Americans or Irish Americans or (in this case) Muslim Americans...they just wanted to be Americans. They realized that to do so was not tantamount to brushing aside their history, culture and affiliation to where they came from.

Multiculturalism did away with all of that. Instead of celebrating your new home...instead of assimilating into your new culture the emphasis has been put on fighting those very concepts so as to not "lose" one's sense of where they came from.

Let's assume you're right Dave. You and I can say that til we're blue in the face. How are you gonna stop an immigrant from deciding how they want to act and whether they choose to become "american" or stay glued to their old roots? I have my own thoughts on the problem but I'll get to those when this line of discussion ends.

parrot · January 9, 2007

I'll play.

The first thing that we need to do is get rid of this asinine policy of multiculturalism that seemingly took over in the 90's. The idea of preserving one's cultural identity at the expense of the culture that you live in is, IMO, a HUGE problem.

This country was built upon immigration and the diversity that it brought. While there was no shortage of people trying to keep their roots alive, they also branched out and wanted their flowers to bloom as an American. When you talk to older generations who immigrated to the US they usually will regale you with stories about how they and their parents wanted to be Americans w/all of the fiber in their being. They didn't say they wanted to be Italian Americans or Irish Americans or (in this case) Muslim Americans...they just wanted to be Americans. They realized that to do so was not tantamount to brushing aside their history, culture and affiliation to where they came from.

Multiculturalism did away with all of that. Instead of celebrating your new home...instead of assimilating into your new culture the emphasis has been put on fighting those very concepts so as to not "lose" one's sense of where they came from.

Okay, which forms of multiculturalism should we do away with and how do we do away with it? Are we talking codifying this or just generally discouraging it?

D_House · January 9, 2007

:popcorn:

davebg · January 9, 2007

Let's assume you're right Dave. You and I can say that til we're blue in the face. How are you gonna stop an immigrant from deciding how they want to act and whether they choose to become "american" or stay glued to their old roots? I have my own thoughts on the problem but I'll get to those when this line of discussion ends.

Frankly, I'm not sure how you go about effecting such change. Really it requires a whole new mindset on the part of society. I think that this view is perpetuated more by society as a whole, rather than individual immigrants. Somehow we managed to advance the concept of multiculturalism...now we need to figure out how to advance the concept of Americanism (for lack of a better word.)

I remember in college that I had multicultural class requirements that I had to meet in order to graduate. Yet, I can recall no requirement for students to take classes that focused on our own country. While I think that it was a good thing that I took some classes that exposed me to different cultures, I believe (in retrospect) that it did so at the expense of my own culture (not so much at my expense, but maybe for others who took this as a mandate to immerse themselves in the culture that they or their families came from, rather than the culture in which they lived now.)

There are other ways where we can encourage/discourage such thinking. For example, the whole bi-lingual debate. The idea that we are willing to coddle people to such an extent that we go out of our way to provide information in a language other than english blows my mind. People who favor bi-lingual stuff put forth the argument that it is not fair to deny people the rights and services that they are entitled to b/c they can't read/speak english. All that does is discourage those people from properly integrating themselves into our society by learning the language. I don't speak any language other than english. If I moved to another country where english wasn't the primary language I would do so w/the expectation that I would have to learn the language to thrive. I don't see why it's different when people get to the US.

In a sense it kind of goes back to the whole pussification of America discussion. Our society has become so PC that we seemingly have abandoned any sense of responsibility for ourselves. It's become far too easy to fall into the vicious cycle of Joe needs help b/c he's from another culture, but Joe doesn't know about/how to obtain help b/c he hasn't assimilated yet, so let's give him more help that caters to his culture, which in turn reduces his need or motivation to assimilate into our culture...which was the whole point in the first place.

Concrete Charlie · January 10, 2007

Frankly, I'm not sure how you go about effecting such change. Really it requires a whole new mindset on the part of society. I think that this view is perpetuated more by society as a whole, rather than individual immigrants. Somehow we managed to advance the concept of multiculturalism...now we need to figure out how to advance the concept of Americanism (for lack of a better word.)

I remember in college that I had multicultural class requirements that I had to meet in order to graduate. Yet, I can recall no requirement for students to take classes that focused on our own country. While I think that it was a good thing that I took some classes that exposed me to different cultures, I believe (in retrospect) that it did so at the expense of my own culture (not so much at my expense, but maybe for others who took this as a mandate to immerse themselves in the culture that they or their families came from, rather than the culture in which they lived now.)

There are other ways where we can encourage/discourage such thinking. For example, the whole bi-lingual debate. The idea that we are willing to coddle people to such an extent that we go out of our way to provide information in a language other than english blows my mind. People who favor bi-lingual stuff put forth the argument that it is not fair to deny people the rights and services that they are entitled to b/c they can't read/speak english. All that does is discourage those people from properly integrating themselves into our society by learning the language. I don't speak any language other than english. If I moved to another country where english wasn't the primary language I would do so w/the expectation that I would have to learn the language to thrive. I don't see why it's different when people get to the US.

In a sense it kind of goes back to the whole pussification of America discussion. Our society has become so PC that we seemingly have abandoned any sense of responsibility for ourselves. It's become far too easy to fall into the vicious cycle of Joe needs help b/c he's from another culture, but Joe doesn't know about/how to obtain help b/c he hasn't assimilated yet, so let's give him more help that caters to his culture, which in turn reduces his need or motivation to assimilate into our culture...which was the whole point in the first place.

I agree with Dave. If we give someone permission to abuse us, they probably will. And we've been handing out 'abuse us' coupons all over the world for a long time now. If we stand up to them, they cannot.

As usual, the people asking Dave, earlier in this thread, to elaborate are displaying a very familiar sequence that we see in American policy discourse: A problem exists(in this case, hostile Islamic immigration in Britain), most everyone agrees it is a growing problem. Some people(group, administration, etc) takes action to correct it, or, even just makes public their idea of what should be done about it. Another person or group says, "Hey, that's not right, you're not showing respect/fairness/understanding to them" you're being un-American, regardless of the lack of respect/fairness/understanding coming the 'problem people'. Then the vocal opposition group will proceed to denigrate anything the action takers did, or will do, to fix the problem. All this time, they come up with n o t h i n g that will possibly solve the problem, their entire emphasis is on condemning the action takers.

If someone, we, a group, a culture, a country doesn't stand up to the sinister infiltration of the West by Islamic radicals as illustrated in the account from Britain above, we will all be a lot sorrier than we already are.

Boz/BoFan · January 10, 2007

I agree with Dave. If we give someone permission to abuse us, they probably will. And we've been handing out 'abuse us' coupons all over the world for a long time now. If we stand up to them, they cannot.

As usual, the people asking Dave, earlier in this thread, to elaborate are displaying a very familiar sequence that we see in American policy discourse: A problem exists(in this case, hostile Islamic immigration in Britain), most everyone agrees it is a growing problem. Some people(group, administration, etc) takes action to correct it, or, even just makes public their idea of what should be done about it. Another person or group says, "Hey, that's not right, you're not showing respect/fairness/understanding to them" you're being un-American, regardless of the lack of respect/fairness/understanding coming the 'problem people'. Then the vocal opposition group will proceed to denigrate anything the action takers did, or will do, to fix the problem. All this time, they come up with n o t h i n g that will possibly solve the problem, their entire emphasis is on condemning the action takers.

If someone, we, a group, a culture, a country doesn't stand up to the sinister infiltration of the West by Islamic radicals as illustrated in the account from Britain above, we will all be a lot sorrier than we already are.

Thank you, been at work for the past 12 hrs unable to defend myself. Of course smarmy fockholes like parrot reduce it to muslim hating as opposed to identifying the fact that MAYBE just MAYBE their little sugar plumb visions of everyone holding hands and singing kumbya wont work if the very tenets of the religion of the guys hand your holding is to kill you if you dont convert. They may not kill you, but its a pretty damn tough place to start negotiations. They just cant get past the fact that someone may have something objectionable to say about another faith. OH MY GOD, CALL THE FOCKING PC POLICE! Obviously parrot and the like didnt read it.

Obviously, they are not all like that but my point is its more than you think, which is shown in this article.

Maybe some of you cannot wrap your head around how powerful this faith is, how insanely devoted these people are to this book because you have never had it yourself. I just dont understand how people cant see it.

Im not here to tell you what to do, you wouldnt do it anyway. Im gonna vote the right people in office and continue to enjoy the show that is you liberal lap dogs salivating at the chance to hear someone even mention a race other than caucasian and then forgoing any rational thought and flipping the phuck out once its finally mentioned, an then you pounce, in all of your guilt assuaging splendor. Its ok to be white ya know.

parrot · January 10, 2007

Thank you, been at work for the past 12 hrs unable to defend myself. Of course smarmy fockholes like parrot reduce it to muslim hating as opposed to identifying the fact that MAYBE just MAYBE their little sugar plumb visions of everyone holding hands and singing kumbya wont work if the very tenets of the religion of the guys hand your holding is to kill you if you dont convert. They may not kill you, but its a pretty damn tough place to start negotiations. They just cant get past the fact that someone may have something objectionable to say about another faith. OH MY GOD, CALL THE FOCKING PC POLICE! Obviously parrot and the like didnt read it.

You're right, I didn't read it. Maybe if you weren't such an utter fockface most of the time I'd be more inclined to read the stuff you post. :pointstosky:

Obviously, they are not all like that but my point is its more than you think, which is shown in this article.
Maybe some of you cannot wrap your head around how powerful this faith is, how insanely devoted these people are to this book because you have never had it yourself. I just dont understand how people cant see it.

9/11 was a pretty good hint as to how powerful the faith is.

Im not here to tell you what to do, you wouldnt do it anyway. Im gonna vote the right people in office and continue to enjoy the show that is you liberal lap dogs salivating at the chance to hear someone even mention a race other than caucasian and then forgoing any rational thought and flipping the phuck out once its finally mentioned, an then you pounce, in all of your guilt assuaging splendor. Its ok to be white ya know.

You have no focking clue about me, me politics, my views on Islam/terrorism, or what I would or wouldn't do. You just assume because you have a stupid, narrow, binary view of people.

Vote the right people in office to do what exactly? It shouldn't be that tough a question for someone as rational as yourself to answer.

Boz/BoFan · January 11, 2007

You're right, I didn't read it. Maybe if you weren't such an utter fockface most of the time I'd be more inclined to read the stuff you post.

9/11 was a pretty good hint as to how powerful the faith is.

You have no focking clue about me, me politics, my views on Islam/terrorism, or what I would or wouldn't do. You just assume because you have a stupid, narrow, binary view of people.

Vote the right people in office to do what exactly? It shouldn't be that tough a question for someone as rational as yourself to answer.

I know you sounded a little bit like popeye in your third sentence there.

Moderate muslims...in a nutshell

Recommended Posts

Boz/BoFan 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

parrot 789

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Boz/BoFan 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

parrot 789

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

wiffleball 4,789

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

davebg 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Boz/BoFan 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Strike 5,487

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Boz/BoFan 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

parrot 789

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Strike 5,487

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Boz/BoFan 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Peens 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Boz/BoFan 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Strike 5,487

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

parrot 789

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

DanXIII 8

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Peens 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Strike 5,487

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Boz/BoFan 0

Share this post