Jump to content
Islamic Forum


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by fallow

  1. Did you look at the actual website? And did you look at the other blogs they link to? It seems that there are a LOT of people like this.


    What I found most scary about the top26 events was the number which were praising jihadi groups for attacking government forces seemingly merely because that the government wouldn't resign and allow an Islamic state to be formed.

  2. what im suggesting is that if youve never traveled space you canot say that it is endless.All of your theories about space being endless is false because noone has traveled there to really see if that is true and yes its possible that it can be an end.


    What do you mean 'end'? i'd be happy to accept that it could have an end - but what happens when you go past the end? This doesn't really have anything to do with the existence or non-existence of god/s, though.


    Oh and what proofs from MUSLIMS that dot invited .What is this about maybe i could offer something


    *sigh* read the first post in this thread. This is supposed to be a thread where believers give proofs of god to convince non-believers.

  3. If you actually care about finding the truth you will do a little research. Have you done anything except read Denier sites?


    The summing up of the judge in David Irving's failed libel suit (in which the defence argued truth as a denfence and in effect proved the Holocaust to the satisfaction of the court) is an excellent and cooly logical laying out of the evidence that the Holocaust happened. You'll need to search for it (not a problem for a disinterested scholar like you, Yassie), but it's on the web.


    edit - typo

  4. twswords, I'm not sure what you're getting at when you say that we can't see to the end of the universe - what are you suggesting is there? (Note that by definition 'the universe' is everything, so whatever is there will still be part of the universe).


    And the proofs from Muslims that Dot invited aren't exactly coming thick and fast, are they? So far we've had the Argument from Creation and a bit of spiritual fluff.

  5. You donot stand on your own ground you leap frog off of the theist and call yourself an athiest. You refuse the existence of GOD but yet you need the same GOD for your belief to exist. You use us theist for the base of your belief. So you have tried to elevate yourself by giving yourself a sense of self importance by going against me a theist by calling yourself an atheist. We theist donot need your belief to exist,we never have. We never sprang off of you nonbelievers to structure our belief system, you must be a pompous a.. and arrogant if you think you can do that and not be challenged(no disrespect to you)


    I ask you again - you don't believe in the existence of the Hindu gods. Is that proof that they do exist? Does that mean that they are the basis of your belief?

  6. Laws being too vague is not really an excuse to completely remove them.


    No, but it does show that there's something wrong. It might be that the law just needs to be rewritten, but it can also show that there's a fundamental injustice underrlying the law. In this case, the idea that richer people could be trusted with nudity and poorer people couldn't.


    There is always disagreement regarding the defining of arts. But all it shows is that we are people with different opinions. It's democracy indeed. You cannot please everyone. However, we can work on it until we are able to make as minimum differences as possible. Don't use it for your own advantage to completely force your extreme values over others.


    Yes and no. "Community standards" (ie the will of the majority, ie democracy) are supposed to be an element in legal decisions, and community standards are against censorship. However, community standards are not expected to decide specialised matters. The Arts, like any other specialised field, has its own scholars, and their opinion matters more. My views aren't 'extreme' at all. I can't think of one person working in the arts or with an interest in the arts who doesn't think free speech is the best way.


    Why are men supposed to feel better if they have hate speech?


    Did I say that? No. That's like arguing against trains because trains sometimes kill people.

  7. but i do reconise that the idea exist and if it didnt there would be no reason for me not to believe in satan um i mean santa


    Yes, you recognize that the IDEA exists - I recognize that the IDEA of supreme being/s exists, but so does the idea of the Flying Spagetti Monster, the Tooth Fairy and every other idea. I don't believe that the Hindu gods Hanuman and Ganesh exist - does that means that you think they DO exist?


    edit - this is far too subtle for this argument :sl:, but: I don't need to be able to precisely define something to not believe that it exists -I don't believe in anything which is postulated to be beyond the laws of nature. Thus without precisely defining them I don't believe in gods, ghosts, bogeymen, galactic turtles, angels, goblins, djinns, pixies, fairies, or any other supernatural beastie whatsoever.

  8. Read the 'top 26 events of 2007', according to a radical Islamist site. The War of Terrorism migt have its flaws, but it seems that it is necessary.


    (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_revival.muslimpad(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/2008/01/03/the-top-26-events-that-affected-the-muslim-world-in-2007-%e2%80%93-the-year-of-surprises/#more-85"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_revival.muslimpad(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/2008/01/03/th...prises/#more-85[/url]


    #1 is OBL's video:


    …And then there he was. He appeared on camera with his calm yet concentrated face.


    The man who single handedly brought America down to its knees sits upright with might and honor giving his message to America and the world.


    The man who is in control of the world’s most powerful and feared Islaamic movement… the man who had a hand in shaping world events… the man who exposed the West’s immense hatred of Islaam… the man who revived the love of Islaam and Jihaad in the hearts of millions of Muslims across the world both directly and indirectly… the man who shocked all conspiracy theorists… the man who healed the breasts of the believers around the world… the man who had America fall into the bear trap of Afghanistan… the man who split the world into two poles: the camp of Imaan and the camp of Kufr… the man who did all these things and more with Allah’s help and love, yet spoke with great softness in his voice as if to say, “America and the rest of the world… you’ve gone through a hell lot because of me and my movement… now it’s about time you listen to me and see what I have to say,” mixed with a tone of commandment as if to say, “This is how things will unfold if you don’t do this and that.”


    He touched on a lot of subjects, some which surprised America. But for many of us, the only thing we couldn’t get out of our heads was the fact that he’s alive and waging a global war against the Kuffaar and Murtadoon for the sake of Allah.

  9. nope. that's my solution. dismantle illegal jewish settlements and security apartheid walls in occupied PALESTINIAN territories and you gonna see real peace between israelis and PALESTINIANS. trust me.


    OK, I'll ask you for the third time - how do you propose to ACHIEVE this?


    now you're talking. israelis gonna RETALIATE against suicide bombers but you expect PALESTINIANS to grin from ear to ear when israelis build illegal settlements and apartheid walls on their lands. right? shame on you. mark you sucide bombers pop up when israelis contravened un resolutions by building illegal settlements, bulldozed PALESTINIANS homes etc in occupied territories.


    I don't expect the Palestinians to do anything. I expect some of their supposed friends to realise that suicide bombing can only make the situation worse. Tell me, how do you think suicide bombing helps the Palestinian cause? How do you think Iran threatening to wipe israel off the map helps the Palestinian cause?


    as you can see all peace talks crumbled coz they're sabotaged by israelis via their stranglehold on occupied PALESTINIAN terroritories.


    Actually, the last serious prospect of peace failed because an idiot israeli assasinated Rabin. I agree that violent fools plague both sides.


    simple commonsense gonna tell you had the us put its foot down and stop israeli manipulation of those territories, there could be hope in the socalled peace talks.


    Yes, peace talks = negotiations. But it is simply impossible for the US to change its stance as long as israel's existence is threatened by the idiot friends of the Palestinians.


    now you're heckling. simple commonsense gonna tell you israeli PALESTINIAN conflict doesn't flare out of the blue. there must be reasons. and they are britain fork tongue promises to the arabs and thoughtless un decision on PALESTINE so as to resurrect israel. mark you PALESTINIANS then were made up of majority muslim arabs, jews, christians etc.


    And how precisely does this lead you to a SOLUTION?



    simple commonsense gonna tell you had the us stopped donating billions worth of arms to israel, israel would enjoy less military might to murder and plunder PALESTINIANS. consequently PALESTINIANS wouldnt feel oppressed and vengeful so much as to become suicide bombers. as you can see israel and the us uphold terrorism under the cloak of democracy, they wanna destroy 'peace' talks that would lead to less manipulation of PALESTINIANS lands.


    Rightly or wrongly the US is not going to allow israel's existence to be threatened. That's a simple fact and no amount of ranting will change it. Given that fact, how are the palestinians going to achieve the best result possible? Certainly not by attemping to kill israeli civilians.


    simple commonsense gonna tell you negotiations couldn't begin from nothing. someone has to give way. de klerk has the brain to give way by DISMANTLING apartheid in 1990. will olmert have the brain to DISMANTLE apartheid in occupied PALESTINIANS territories to show his sincerity. no? why?

    how did the battle begin? it started with britain giving fork tongue promises to arabs and thoughtless un decision to divide PALESTINE at PALESTINIANS expense. right? as you can see history is important in finding out how and why wars and conflicts began.


    You're getting upset over things that are not possible to change. The US will not allow israel to be destroyed. As long as the Palestinians and their idiot friends keep up the petty violence there will be no incentive to change anything. No, it isn't FAIR, but so what? Do you want FAIR and failure, or unfair and the best result possible (a great result is no longer possible, thanks to the idiot friends of the Palestinians)? Yelling 'It isn't FAIR, mommy!' is not going to get anyone anywhere, except dead.

  10. so tell me how can you dibelieve in a supreme being without reconising that there is one???


    LOL! I disbelieve in Santa Clause, that means Santa Clause exists, right? I disbelieve in Ganesh, that means Ganesh exists, right?


    I suspect that you are using an odd definition of 'disbelieve in'. I use it to mean 'do not believe in the existence of'.


    edit - the definition of atheist you have problems with means 'supreme being or supreme beings'. Yes, English can be a confusing language.

  11. ive never heard that a Muslim canot play the piano. that person who said that is wrong. if we cant play the piano then why do Muslims have cell phones that they themselves program to ring at different melodies???? even scholars!!!that ststement my friend is crap!!!!!!!


    LOL - I never thought I'd ever be telling a Muslim about Islam. But. Many - some people say most - scholars regard musical instruments (other than the duff) as haram.


    This is what Sunnipath says: (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_qa.sunnipath(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/issue_view.asp?HD=1&ID=1786&CATE=142"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_qa.sunnipath(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/issue_view.asp?HD=...86&CATE=142[/url]


    In the light of the evidences that will be mentioned later, the following are unlawful in Shariah:


    a) Musical instruments that are exclusively designed for entertainment and dancing, and create charm, pleasure and bliss on their own (even without the singing), such as the drum, violin, guitar, fiddle, flute, lute, mandolin, harmonium, piano, string, etc… are impermissible to use under any circumstance.


    There is a consensus of the whole Ummah on this. Since the first century, the Companions (sahaba), their followers (tabi’een), jurists (fuqaha) and the scholars have been generally unanimous on this ruling.

  12. how to get peace between israel and PALESTINIANS? easy. i repeat - dismantle ALL illegal jewish settlements and security apartheid walls in occupied PALESTINIAN territories. israel is for israelis and PALESTINE is for PALESTINIANS. dig?


    I repeat, that is your AIM, but you have given no plan about how to ACHIEVE it.


    so? since the us gonna continue supporting israel, and no arab country and no PETTY terrorism gonna defeat israel, israel gonna continue oppressing and terrorising PALESTINIANS. right? is that what you wanna imply? be honest now.


    Of course. That's my entire point. People who encourage the Palestinians to keep killing themselves for no good reason (it isn't going to achieve anything except retaliation) are prolonging the problem, not solving it.


    read your post dilligently and reflect whether israelis gonna follow the process. will israelis wanna have a referendum whereby they agree to withdraw from occupied PALESTINIAN territories? will olmert dismantle illegal jewish resettlements and security apartheid walls in occupied PALESTINIAN territories similar to what de klerk had done when he DISMANTLED apartheid in 1990? there you are. since you so want olmert and abbas negotiate like what de klerk and mandela had done, you should encourage olmert to return what israel has stolen from PALESTINIANS. right? you dont agree? why?


    Why did de Klerk begin the process which eventually lead to the end of apartheid and majority rule? Because he had been in negotiatoin with Mandela. Because Mandela convinced him of his good will (ie Mandela did not rant about wiping South Africa off the map, or wading through blood or the other childish stuff we constanty hear from the so-called friends of the Palestinians).


    if you follow history, the socalled invasion in 1967 was brought about by many factors, first and foremost is britain's fork tongue promise to arabs when it wanna them help topple ottoman empire.


    Poor Arabs, unable to make pragmatic decisions about actual conditions today, trapped by their bitterness about the past ... That's how you are portraying them.


    anothor deciding factor is un thoughtless decision to divide PALESTINE without considering native PALESTINIANS' feelings. most of the jews then were imports. yet un gave them a bigger share of PALESTINE than the PALESTINIAN themselves. and you expect PALESTINIANS to grin ear to ear. right? rat!


    This is all irrelevant. You have agreed that it is not possible to change the situation militarily, and you ought to be able to see that continuing a military struggle results in death and suffering for the Palestinians. So what do you suggest? Ending the violence and negotiating is simply the only choice.


    look at yourself. are you being objective? nope. you keep on harping on negotiation and you can't even think what sort of negotiation should be taken between olmert and abbas. should it start with PALESTINIANS bowing reverently as israelis terrorized occupied territories? should it start with olmert returning stolen lands? no comment? there you are


    You are obsessed with matters of honour and totally ignore practicalities. Yes, thanks to the idiot friends of the Palestinians they are not going to be able to negotiate anywhere near as good a deal as they would have prior to 1967. They aren't even going to be able to negotiate as a good a deal as they would have 10 years ago. With each passing day their negotiating position beocmes weaker. But their only choices are to keep going as they are until no Palestine is left, or negotiating.


    and the word "comfortable" - how do you feel when olmert builds illegal jewish resettlements in occupied PALESTINIAN territories?


    He's building them on land won in battle when his country was attacked by enemies. That's how the borders of most countries were decided. If the idiot friends of the Palestinians had negotiated instead of invaded it could be Palestinian land today.

  13. Whats the matter with playing the piano????? Idont get this statement. No we dont rely heavely on scholars but those who are lazy and dont study do.


    Are you sure you're a Muslim? As someone earlier in this thread pointed out, most scholar believe that playing musical instruments (except the duff) is forbidden for Musilms. And aren't unqualified Muslims specifically warned against trying to interpret the Koran and hadiths themselves?


    Yes scholars have opinions, can they be wrong YES, Hey im pretty sure you went to school, your teachers were like your scholars you took their opinions and if it was applicable to you, you used it. But we are governed by the QURAN it says in it that the QUARN is the best of hadith so this is what we follow.


    So my point is, if hadiths appear to conflict and if scholars can be wrong, how does anyone know what is forbidden or permitted in Islam? More specifically, how will a caliphate make laws?

  14. as far as laws is concerened the QUARN deals with every situation in every time.


    Possibly, but you can't actually tell me whether playing the piano is legal or illegal for Muslims, can you? You can only tell me what a majority of scholars think. So, in the Caliphate, will they take a vote among scholars and the majority verdict becomes the law? Or what?


    PS - thanks Redeem.

  15. Do you know from where I got those quotes? ... I got them from a christian website......


    So? Bush is a Christian, Blair is a Christian - do you believe them? And the Christians who reject evolution tend to be fundamentalists (that is, backwards), anyway.


    How did the universe come in to existence .... Whats ur opinion about big bang ...


    I don't know how the universe came into existence - it might not have, it might have always existed in one form or another. I don't think anyone claims to know (I mean any scientist), do they? As with the expanding universe (to wich it's related, surely?) all I know aoiut the big bang is that it's currently the best model there is for the very early universe, I think.

  16. and my solution is simple - dismantle ALL illegal jewish settlements and security apartheid walls in occupied PALESTINIAN territories. israel is for israelis and PALESTINE is for PALESTINIANS. different from what you have in mind. right? what you want is for israelis to continue squatting in occupied PALESTINIAN territories. right? why?


    No? When did I say that?


    And it's all very well you having an aim in mind, you still haven't suggested how to get it! Is the US going to stop supporting israel? No. Will any Arab country be able to defeat israel? No. Will the petty terrorsim of the Palestinians defeat israel? No.


    indeed they negotiated but de klerk took the FIRST step to materialize the peace talks by DISMANTLING apartheid. will olmert DISMANTLE all illegal jewish settlements etc in occupied PALESTINIAN territories pointed out by mandela? well? mark you saudi did have a peace plan but israel rejected it. you know why?


    They negotiated some easing of apartheid while Mandela was still in jail, but the system was basically still in place until after a referendum of the white population which basically agreed to giving all people an equal vote. Until that referendum was won the worst of apartheid was still in place - your skin colour determined if you could vote or not. Every step of the way was a negotiation. The apartheid regime was much nastier and of much longer standing and opressed far more people than israel. Yet it ended without a bloodbath.


    in other words you have no sense of fair play. you are comfortable with the sufferings endured by hapless PALESTINIANS as long as israelis get what they crave for ie PALESTINIAN lands. rat!

    you are scared of your own shadow. you know arab nations + PALESTINIANS + the world are no match for israel/the us might but you stay fearful incase israeli terrorism against PALESTINIANS gonna backfire.


    What does "a sense of fair play" have to do with thinking that the so-called friends of the Palestinians are doing them a huge disservice by encouraging their puny and futile violence rather than negotiation? If the so-called friends of the Palestinians had negotiated rather than invaded in 1967 Palestine could be a happy place today.


    Why do you say I am "comfortable" with the suffering of the Palestinians? Getting emotional and encouraging violence by Palestinians against israel is the best possible way to damage the future prospects of the Palestinians. What the Palestinians DON'T need is emo kids getting outraged on their behalf.

  17. If you love mutations then you can watch this video.....


    Sorry, my connection is to slow for YouTube. I don't "love" mutations - I know that mutation can sometimes be beneficial to an organism. Sometimes it isn't and sometimes it's neutral.


    Even I dont have gurentee in what you have quoted, and the same way I cant believe in ur quotes unless you check them .......


    No, you don't, but I have given you a reference that you could check. You have now posted two dishonestly misleading quotes - they were the only two I checked. The others could be equally dishonest. Doesn't that teach you something about the sites you get them from?


    Why dont you read my posts first of all.....What did I say about the discussion of evolution in this topic? I know it wont be fruitful any more ..... When I have stopped, now you are trying to pull it again.... You simply love arguments ....

    Kindly read what people write before posting....


    No idea what you are talking about.


    Dear fellow

    Ok ..... What do you say about the expansion of universe?


    As far as I know an expanding universe is still the accepted model. I could be wrong - I'm not an astrophysicist.

  18. What every the description it will be, it should still has to deal with the cells, and even 1 single cell is not able to evolve it self. Not to speak of cells, but not even a single DNA could evolve.


    I don't know enough about the subject to argue this (and neither do you, I assume) - I am willing to trust that scientists have considered this and still accept evolution as the best explanation. I am certain that if you look it up on Wiki you will find an explanation.



    You cannot answer to this question... and the evolutionist even cannot.

    I would like to ask you back the same question. I know about mutations, and evolutionists has been testing to see if their theory is correct.


    Can you give me 1 example of a gentic mutation. Even a great evolutionist who talkes about mutation was unable to answer this question, so if you could answer then I think you need to take over his place..


    I don't understand your question. Are you saying that genetic mutations never happen? If so, what is the point of the pics you have posted?


    So you talk about mutations right... See the results of it... Its so harmful to life..


    Yes, some mutations decrease the chances of an organism breeding successfully, some don't, and some enhance it. It's random.


    Thats what evolutionist say simply. Their hope is left on artists who can draw well and story tellers and writers who can influence the people... The reason why I chose evolution vs creationism is to show you the proof that God has created it... But since you are simply ignoring on what I say, ( what evolutionists do when it goes to a certain extent) then I am sure this wont help in this matter .....


    No, I said at the very beginning that I do not want to debate evolution with you. Neither of us knows enough about biology to debate the actual current issues in evolution, and I have no reason whatsoever to doubt the scientific method (surely you don't, either) nor its honest application by the overwhelming number of scientists who accept that evolution answers questions about life better than any other hypothesis.


    You have already been shown that a quote you got from a creationist site was dishonestly misleading - have you actually checked these other quotes? If not, I'd be silly to take them seriously, wouldn't I?


    Also, even if the quotes are genuine, you have about 10. How many scientists are there in the world who accept evolution? It must be in the millions.


    edit - OK, I've done your work for you. Again! It took me under 5 seconds on google. PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU CHECK THINGS BEFORE STATING THEM AS FACTS! I'm simply not going to believe any further quotes you post unless you confirm that you have checked them.


    The widely touted “Dr. Etheridge, of the British Museum,” who always appeared in creationist literature without a given name, was quoted by Townsend as saying, “In all this great museum there is not a particle of evidence transmutation of species. Nine-tenths of the talk of evolution is sheer nonsense, not founded on observation and wholly unsupported by fact. This museum is full of proofs of the utter falsity of their views.” The content of Etheridge’s statement varied from work to work, and its source remained unidentified, except for Alexander Patterson’s comment that Etheridge was answering a question put to him by a Dr. George E. Post. When curious parties in the 1920s inquired about the identity of Etheridge, the director of the British Museum surmised that the man in question was “Robert Etheridge, Junr., who was Assistant Keeper of Geology in this Museum from 1881 to 1891,” at which time he left for Australia, where he died in 1920. The director hastened to add that “Mr. Etheridge’s opinion on this subject should not be considered as in any way representing scientific opinion in this Museum.”


    The Creationists - the Evolution of Scientific Creationism by Ronald L. Numbers, available from Amazon(contact admin if its a beneficial link)

  19. it's manipulated self defence and you know it. israel is a defensive parasite. it build illegal jewish settlements, security apartheid walls in PALESTINIAN lands and scream self defence. its cruel intention is clear, it wanna oppress and provoke PALESTINIANS to become suicide bombers out of desperation and vengence. israel don't wanna peace and you know it. otherwise it wouldn't have terrorized PALESTINIANS as such.


    You don't actually have a solution, you just want to see some dead Jews.


    if you follow the news you gonna find de klerk made the first move towards peace by dismantling apartheid in south africa in 1990. this paved the way for mandela becoming the first black president in 1994. there you are.


    Umm, no. Mandela and De Klerk NEGOTIATED the dismantling of apartheid. Mandela's release in 1990 was part of the negotiation process. Read some history.


    the us is not being fair towards the PALESTINIANS when it donates billions worth of arms to israelis, leaving PALESTINIANS at their mercy. right? simple commonsense should tell you without the us support, israel would never be able to terrorize PALESTINIANS as it's doing now. hence the level playing field. guns with guns not guns with stones.


    So the US is not being 'fair'. So what? How would an all-out war (in which israel would use its nukes - presumably against Damascus and Teheran, but possibly against Mecca) do anything except make you feel better?


    If the problem is to be SOLVED, there is no choice but negotiation.

  20. So you weren't speaking of the codification of the Hadiths (the laws of systematically classifying them), but a general codification of Islam?


    Of the laws, yes. Sorry for the confusion. But thanks for your post about the types of hadith and so on., It's interesting stuff. I'll try the link you gave befoire I try books, but I'll keep it in mind.


    Of course they would. But it isn't as simple as you are implying. I could name a list of reasons, but that really wouldn't accomplish anything.



    Thanks. Please understand that what follows is NOT intended to insult Muslims or Islam.


    I fully understand that extracting the truth the Koran and hadiths is complicated, and so complicated that the task of unravelling it is not yet completed and may never be. (I wouldn't regard it as completed until someone can point to law #3333654 and say that that law permits the playing of the piano by Muslims.)


    I also fully understand that just because it is complicated doesn't mean it is false or anything of the sort. We humans have to do the best we can with the realities of the universe.


    I also fully understand that the Ummah is extremely diverse, with many different cultures and standards of education and so on, and that internal disputes are inevitable.


    BUT with all this, I don't understand why Muslims are often inflexible and easily upset. Surely people operating in such a complex system where getting a definitive answer is often impossible, where allowances have to be made for other cultures and so on, should be supreme praticioners of negotiation and compromise. Yet the opposite seems to be the case: shooting oneself in the foot as a matter of principle seems to be regarded as a virtue.


    AND I don't understand how the legal system of a Caliphate works, if courts have to not only decide if someone is guilty, but if what they did was a crime in the first place.

  21. if you dont believe any supernatural being exist and the name Allah means AL (THE) LAH(GOD) THE GOD. if you dont believe that then how do you explain calling yourself a christian??? are you a hypocrite?? im not being funny please explain.


    Read my sig. I'm culturally a Christian and an agnostic (some atheists might want to call me a soft athiest). Secular christianity isn't all that uncommon.

  22. By 'codification' I mean a set of agreed-upon laws, which can be referred to for a definitive judgement.


    If there are codified laws, why on earth does the Ummah disagree over so many things? Surely Muslims would PREFER to obey the laws of Allah, and if they were in fact codified it would be simple to do so. Why do some argue that piano-playing is permissable when all it should take if for someone to point out the agree-upon law against it? This doesn't happen. Both sides swap hadiths and rulings from opposing scholars and Sunnipath and no definitive position is ever reached.



    Twoswords, please read my sig. I'm a cultural christian and an agnostic.