Jump to content
Islamic Forum
anthony19832005

Can A Good Muslims Also Be Secularist?

Recommended Posts

The polling is good, it shows that Muslims love being Muslims despite of all of the "freedom" the West has offerred them.
What is shows is that a significant portion of Muslims want to impose their values on societies that don't want them.

 

The West says "come and do as you want". The Muslims get here and cry "We are here now we want you to live like us".

 

Then explain this: Even your golden age of Spain would be a step back compared to what we have today. <---- What do you have today in your modern age that makes you so proud?

 

Well, in the US we don't have slavery based on religion like Spain did. You are not exempt from political office based on your religion here. There are no massacres occurring in the US because of religion. The advances in technology do not even compare.

 

To live in the US you do not have to submit to any religion. To live in Spain you had to acknowledge Muslim superiority.

You won't get executed in the US for attempting to convert the wrong person to your religion.

All citizens pay the same taxes regardless of their religion.

You can marry anyone you want regardless of religion.

The courts do not differentiate between people based on their religion.

In the United States the majority rules and the majority decides who runs the country. In Spain it was a religious minority that made all the decisions.

 

Can you give me any examples at all of how the Golden Age of Spain was in any way shape or form better than the United States of today?

 

They were also upset at the Jews for helping the Muslims conquer Spain, as Jews made up a large part of their army and held many cities for them.
I doubt it if you can give me any proof.

 

It is amazing how ignorant people are of their own histories. It is even more amazing how whitewashed some peoples views of history are. Do they not ever teach Muslims anything except the "happy" parts of their heritage?

 

Both Moslem and Christian sources tell us that Jews provided valuable aid to the invaders. Once captured, the defense of Cordoba was left in the hands of Jews, and Granada, Málaga, Seville, and Toledo were left to a mixed army of Jews and Moors.

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Spain"]Source[/url]

 

711: Muslim forces under Emir of Damascus, Tariq ibn Ziyad, enter Spain from Africa, perhaps by the invitation of Count Julian of the Visigoths. They are welcomed and aided by the Jews as liberators. In Muslim-freed territories, Jews are freed from slavery and allowed to form their own communities. Since the Muslim invaders are all men, they take Spanish (Christian) wives.

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgeocities(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/Athens/Academy/8636/History.html"]Source[/url]

 

It was said that immediately after the invasion, the Jewish population of Toledo “opened the gates†of the city, welcoming the North African Muslims (Wexler 218).

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetsephardiccouncil(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/sages/hispania.html"]Source[/url]

 

That took me all of 10 minutes of research and there are tons more. I suggest you start to use the resources available to you to learn your history. It seems you have a great number of misconceptions of the past.

 

How easy is it for a Masjid to be built? How easy is it for a Synagogue or Church to be built? A Hindu temple? <---- quite easy

 

Here you show your ignorance of history again. Research how easy it was for Christians or Jews to build places of worship, or do I need to do the research for you again?

 

Can a Muslim be killed by the state for converting to Christianity? <--- Apart from being a religion, Islam is an ideology. (Just like your secular ideology .. I believe you would punish those who tried to change your ideology to Sharia inconstitutionally)

 

In other words "yes". And no, you can't be executed for being a communist or a Muslim and trying to spread your beliefs. Your analogy does not work at all.

 

Can a Christian be killed by the state for converting to Islam? <--- No

 

Hypocrisy.

 

How is the Kalif selected? Who selects the people that select the Kalif? <--- you said you have studied sharia .... but it seems you haven't

 

I know the answer. Do you? I know the answer to all these questions, that's why I asked them.

 

What are the rules concerning Buddhists putting up a statue in public? <--- the Prophet used to make a treaty with disbeliever ... pagans ... so today, they would be allowed.

 

Really? Then how come this was rarely practiced throught the history of Sharia?

 

Can Christian churches display the cross in public? <--- Yes, they can

 

Wrong again.

 

Can Muslims own Christian slaves? Can Christians own Muslim slaves? <---- yes .. yes ...

 

Actually it is "Yes, No". Muslims may own Christians, but Christians cannot own Muslims.

 

What is the testimony of a Muslim compared to the testimony of a Hindu? <---- ???

 

In a court of law which one holds the most weight? Do you know?

 

Can non-Muslims be ruled in any fashion by non-Muslims? In what circumstances could a Hindu be elected leader of a Muslim city? <--- they can be leaders in economy, social, political department and etc. I can list them all.

 

That depends on which scholar you talk to. Most of the time this was not allowed, or only allowed in limitted amounts.

 

In a truly just society it would not matter at all.

 

Can a Muslim man marry a Christian woman? Can a Christian man marry a Muslim woman? <--- Yes for the first question, no for the second.

 

More hypocrisy.

 

This is not about creating a safe society. It is about creating and attitude of superiority of Muslims over everyone else. It is about slowly making an entire nation convert to Islam.

 

How do you make a nation convert to Islam over time?

 

First you make sure that no Muslims can convert to anothe religion. If they do then you kill them. Then you allow Muslim men to marry non-Muslim women, thereby using a non-Muslim to make Muslim babies. Of course you don't allow non-Muslim men to marry Muslim women because that could dilute the Muslim baby pool. Then lets make it so that Muslims can own slaves, but Muslims cannot be slaves. How do you get out of being a slave? Easy! Convert to Islam! Make the non-Muslims pay more in taxes too.

 

There may be no compulsion in religion but there sure is one heck of a lot of coercion.

 

It may not be just in the eyes of many "freedom" lovers .. but it has greater benefit in preventing society diseases.
Sure it does. A low crime rate makes up for taking away peoples basic freedoms? I'll pass, thanks.

 

Yes Iran is more advanced ... because they do think bout their minority in getting a seat in Parliament long before America whether or not you think it is applied properly

 

Ask a Jew which one they think is more advanced. The one in which they have a guaranteed seat (Iran) or the one in which they don't (USA). Iran may guarantee Jews a seat, but they also limit the seats they can get. It is simply a token with no real benefit. Whoever holds the seat is obligate, by law, to support the Iranian government. They are not allowed to be for Zionism, even if that is what they truly believe. They are puppets, not people.

 

By limitting them to one seat it guarantees that they will never have any real power. Jews will remain politically impotent as long as this system remains in place.

 

I don't see any difference between a Christian in Indonesia and Muslim in America in terms of freedom. So your statement that US is more advanced in this respect than Muslim countries is absurd.
I asked about your example of Iran, and you answer with Indonesia. Can you answer the original question please? Then, if you want, you can substitute "Jew in .... 1)Syria 2) Saudia Arabia 3)Jordan"

 

It doesn't show anything ... even the Christian Timorese people would move to the US when they got their chance, so were Christian Mexicans ... Christian Venezuelan, argentina ... and many other Christian countries in Asia, Africa and Latin and South America

 

Most of them (Christians) are doing it for the economic reasons. That is not the main reason that Jews are leaving Iran. In fact it was mainly the wealthy ones that have left, many leaving behind their property in order to be able to leave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

Peace be upon those who follow guidance

 

Livius, if you sincerely want your questions answered then ask them at (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetsunnipath(contact admin if its a beneficial link)"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetsunnipath(contact admin if its a beneficial link)[/url]

 

I'll answer some questions to save time.

 

"What is the tax rate for non-Muslims compared to Muslims?"

 

I think the Jizyah for the non-Muslim males is in the same range as Zakat which is mandatory for Muslim males. The non-Muslims might have to pay a little extra but then again the Muslims are obliged to enroll in the army.

 

"When are non-Muslims allowed to be armed? When are Muslims allowed to be armed?"

 

I don't know what you're looking for so ask this at the site I gave you .I think you have to a bit more specific though and give some sort of scenario. I mean for example, if a non-Muslim is getting robbed then he has the right to be armed.

 

"How easy is it for a Masjid to be built? How easy is it for a Synagogue or Church to be built? A Hindu temple?"

 

I don't know.

 

"What are the rules concerning Buddhists putting up a statue in public?"

 

Putting up statues is forbidden for Muslims and non-Muslims alike, that includes Buddhists.

 

"Can a Muslim be killed by the state for converting to Christianity?"

 

Yes.

 

"Can a Christian be killed by the state for converting to Islam?"

 

No, unless after converting to Islam he becomes an apostate.

 

"Can non-Muslims be ruled in any fashion by non-Muslims? In what circumstances could a Hindu be elected leader of a Muslim city?"

 

A non-Muslim wouldn't be ruling non-Muslims in an Islamic State, so no non-Muslims can not be ruled in any fashion by non-Muslims. A Hindu can not be the leader of Muslims in an Islamic State.

 

"How is the Kalif selected? Who selects the people that select the Kalif?"

 

Ask your question at the site I gave you.

 

"Can Christian churches display the cross in public"

 

I think they are allowed to display the cross, I'm not sure though so certainty's sake ask your question on the site.

 

"Can a Muslim man marry a Christian woman? Can a Christian man marry a Muslim woman?"

 

A Muslim man can only marry a pious Christian not just any Christian. A Christian man can not marry a Muslim woman.

 

"What is the testimony of a Muslim compared to the testimony of a Hindu?"

 

I'm not sure about that. As far as I know, the testimony of a Faasiq (sinner) (even Muslim and especially nonMuslims) is not accepted. However, if there are no just witnesses in a particular case and there is fear of somebody's right being neglected and this Faasiq is most probably speaking the truth, then the scholars have ruled that his testimony could be accepted.

 

This thing must be viewed with a case by case basis.

 

Can Muslims own Christian slaves? Can Christians own Muslim slaves?

 

Muslims can own Christian slaves. Christians can not own Muslim slaves.

 

If you do ask your questions at you are not allowed to post links yetsunnipath(contact admin if its a beneficial link) let me know when you get them answered God-willing by a PM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peace Younes Ibn Abd' al-Aziz,

 

I already knew the answers to the questions but I thank you for your reply. I was not sure that many Muslims knew the answers to these questions and I am glad you were able to answer them for those that did not know. It seems many people want Sharia who are not really sure what it is.

 

After answering these questions I hope that, while Sharia may be a good thing for Muslims, it is an enforced state of inferiority for non-Muslims. There is not point in trying to convince non-Muslims that such a state is a good thing for them because it is not.

 

In the past when the other options were worse it was possibly the best system around. With the freedoms available today, though, there is little reason for any non-Muslim to want to live under Sharia rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Livius, I'll just save you the hassle and tell you how it is. We are not the same, and we are not equal. The believer and the unbeliever are not the same, and God will not deal with them the same. This is our religion, these are our laws, if you don't like them.. no one cares. I am not going to sit here and try to glorify Islam to someone who is deaf dumb and blind - pointless isn't it? What do people like you get out of this website? You just argue all day long, do something useful with your time, the lot of you.

 

 

Mehmet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We are not the same, and we are not equal. The believer and the unbeliever are not the same, and God will not deal with them the same.
Then let God deal with me how he sees fit. Until then we should leave each other alone. That means that you do not force your views on me and I do not force my views on you. Sharia, interpretted how it is now, is nothing more than Muslims forcing their views on others.

 

I am not going to sit here and try to glorify Islam to someone who is deaf dumb and blind - pointless isn't it?

 

People are attempting to glorify Sharia and paint it as a peace on earth when it is simply not true. At least be honest with people when you talk about Sharia. Admit that it means, as you say, that we are not equal. That under Sharia Muslims are more important. That under Sharia non-Muslim are nothing more than second class residents of a Muslim nation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He said he only partially agrees that UK and US are fully responsible for the violence in Iraq when:

1. It is the US responsibility to keep stability and order in Iraq after their ousting of Saddam; if they are not prepared to do this then they should never have gone there in the first place.

2. The people of Iraq have been begging them to leave since day one. There were no roses and sweets for the American troops as thought ... how emberassing ...

 

Wassalam,

Yasnov

 

 

I agree that the US and UK shoulder part of the responsibility for keeping Iraq safe and orderly, which is what they are trying to do. But Individual Iraqis also have the responsibility to not murder and terrorize their neighbours simply because they follow a different sect. I fail to see why the Americans are responsible for suicide bombers attacking Iraqi University students. Would you blame the Police when you are mugged, or the man Mugging you?

 

Okay sorry then, I might be wrong but it just seems to me that you have a bit American mentality? since you are asking and you are not an American, maybe you can start thinking about boycotting at least one American product ...?

 

What makes me seem American? The fact that I oppose Sharia law?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Ozy, it was about whether a person can be a good Muslim and a secularist at the same time.

 

Some have voiced their opinion that it is impossible, that good Muslims always want to institute Sharia law.

 

Others say that is not the case.

 

Still others have differed on what Sharia truly means.

 

So basically, you have a group of people saying that the only way to be a good Muslim is to want to make the rest of the people in the world into second class citizens led by Muslims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So basically, you have a group of people saying that the only way to be a good Muslim is to want to make the rest of the people in the world into second class citizens led by Muslims.

But, it's quite alright when Muslims are led by others, and made to be second class citizens.

 

Here's 1 example:

 

Indian Muslims Demand Equality

 

Nilofar Suhrawardy,

Arab News

Thursday, 8, March, 2007

(18, Safar, 1428)

ArabNews

 

NEW DELHI, 8 March 2007 — With banners and posters carrying slogans such as “Down, down with discrimination, up, up with equality and brotherhood,” around ten thousand Muslims participated yesterday in a march from Ramlila Maidan (Old Delhi) to Parliament Street where they held a demonstration.

 

Organized by Tamil Nadu Muslim Munnetra Kazhagam (TMMK), a Muslim demonstration at this scale was held in the capital city for the first time, with Muslim parties, leaders and their supporters gathered at one forum demanding “equality” and reservation for Muslims.

 

In the wake of Sachar Committee Report having highlighted the discrimination faced by Muslims in various sectors, the demonstration was organized to assert Muslims’ demand for equality.

 

In his address, TMMK President M.H. Jawahirullah, who led the march, said: “We want the UPA (United Progressive Alliance) government to implement its program.”

 

Emphasizing that thousands of Muslims have come all the way from South India, Jawahirullah expressed that their demand of “exclusive reservation” for Muslims should be implemented.

 

“Let us (Muslims) grow, the nation will grow faster,” said TMMK leader S. Hyder Ali.

 

Brinda Karat, a legislator from the Communist Party of India-Marxist, also addressed the gathering.

 

“Development of minorities and protection of minorities is the duty of the country,” Karat said emphasizing that this was essential for “development of the country.”

 

Just as the country has budgetary allocations for development of tribal communities, Karat said: “We want budgetary allocations for development of Muslim community.”

 

She asserted the need for all to unite from that very platform to strengthen “secularism” of the country and groups responsible for Gujarat-carnage.

 

“We are not begging,” asserted Rasheed Ahmed Chowdary (United Democratic Front-Assam).

 

“We are asking for the reservation that should be given to us as per the Indian Constitution.”

 

In a similar tone, S.Q.R. Ilyas (All-India Muslim Personal Law Board) said: “We are not asking for anything that is inappropriate, but only that is due to us.”

 

“Protection of Muslims is a duty of the country, not an obligation,” said Asaduddeen Owaisi, Majlis-e-Ittihadul Muslimeen, Andhra Pradesh.

 

“Give us reservation and within five years we will take the country to great heights,” Owaisi asserted.

 

“If Muslims don’t get reservation, nobody else should get it,” he said.

 

On sidelines of the demonstration, expressing satisfaction with there being a large gathering, Jawahirullah told Arab News:

 

“The response to this demonstration has been overwhelming. We are not purchasing people. They have come at their own expense.”

 

On what would be their next course of action, he said that they would present a charter of their demands to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

 

“The government has two and a half years to implement our demands. If they don’t, they lose our support,” he asserted.

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetarabnews(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/?page=4&section=0&article=93296&d=8&m=3&y=2007"]Source: Arab News[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well Ozy, it was about whether a person can be a good Muslim and a secularist at the same time.

 

Some have voiced their opinion that it is impossible, that good Muslims always want to institute Sharia law.

 

Others say that is not the case.

 

Still others have differed on what Sharia truly means.

 

So basically, you have a group of people saying that the only way to be a good Muslim is to want to make the rest of the people in the world into second class citizens led by Muslims.

amen livius.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But, it's quite alright when Muslims are led by others, and made to be second class citizens.

 

I find any society in which people are treated as inferior based on their religion as flawed.

 

I don't see anyone that has condoned such behavior, so why make that comment Thezman? Just because Muslims are being treated in such a way in some places does not make it morally acceptable for Muslims to treat others that way somewhere else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is shows is that a significant portion of Muslims want to impose their values on societies that don't want them.

 

The West says "come and do as you want". The Muslims get here and cry "We are here now we want you to live like us".

 

in theory. Actualy, there have been restrictions upon the wearing of the hijab, Fx, and also it has been dificult for moslems to get permission to build Masjids. And BTW, many people in the west DO "want them", personally i think our societies are enriched by a having a range of cultures.

 

however difficulties and restrictions upon moslems in the west is incomparable to restrictions upon non-moslem and minority sects within Islamic coutnries, and i would fight tooth and nail against the imposition of shariah upon a nation i lived in. Or any other, for that matter.

 

it si the same with slavery, i do not need to be in a certain nation to oppose slavery within that nation.

 

 

Shariah was great for its time, it gave women far more liberty Fx than the extant christianity and judaism, but it has severe flaws in a multi-cultural interlinked world, which is hardly surprising as it was specifically designed to increase the numbers and control of moslems in a society!

 

its use and functionality are now outdated in a modern, pluralistic world, secular laws are infintely more applicable. Nor does living under a secular pluralistic system mean that muslems living there are any less 'muslim' than those under a shariah system. That is just ridiculous.

 

It is perfectly possible to be a Good Muslim and still prefer a secular system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I never said this was a Golden Age, that is you putting words in my mouth once again.

When you said this: Even if "perfect" Sharia exists, how long would it last? Even the rightly guided Kalifs could only keep it going for a short period of time <--- You are insinuating that you have kept your great system and empire going for a longer period of time than the Caliphate.

 

What is shows is that a significant portion of Muslims want to impose their values on societies that don't want them.
No, the article does not say that.

 

Well, in the US we don't have slavery based on religion like Spain did. You are not exempt from political office based on your religion here. There are no massacres occurring in the US because of religion. The advances in technology do not even compare.

It doesn't matter at all what caused the massacres. Religion is just one aspect of life, when you are committing massacres, you are committing massacres and your today's empire is quite good at that.

 

To live in the US you do not have to submit to any religion. To live in Spain you had to acknowledge Muslim superiority.

You won't get executed in the US for attempting to convert the wrong person to your religion.

All citizens pay the same taxes regardless of their religion.

You can marry anyone you want regardless of religion.

The courts do not differentiate between people based on their religion.

In the United States the majority rules and the majority decides who runs the country. In Spain it was a religious minority that made all the decisions.

Your empire may treat its citizens "well" at home, but beyond their own territory, they keep massacring people on a frequent basis and murder is the most heinous crimes. Unless you think those people that are being massacred, tortured are not human and their sufferings caused by your empire do not count.

 

Can you give me any examples at all of how the Golden Age of Spain was in any way shape or form better than the United States of today?

Founded by the Umayyad Caliph Abd al-Rahman in the middle of the 8th century, Andalusia offered remarkable religious tolerance — very similar to what the United States has traditionally offered.

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yettheglobalist(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=3130"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yettheglobalist(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=3130[/url]

 

That took me all of 10 minutes of research and there are tons more. I suggest you start to use the resources available to you to learn your history. It seems you have a great number of misconceptions of the past.
Back to your original statement "There is a reason that the Christians rebelled and kicked out the Muslims, and it was not because they were thrilled with Moorish rule" <----- It was jealousy, hatred and revenge that the Christian crusader troops kicked out the Muslims after ruling it for centuries. Even the Muslim converts who didn't want to leave the religion and embrace Christianity would be persecuted.

 

In a time of tranquility and justice, the Christians have never been compelled to renounce the Gospel and to embrace the Qur'an." 11 As a result of the tolerance displayed by Islam, the incredibly rich language of the Muslims became the official language of literature and scholarship in Spain for all by the year 1000. Christians, Jews, and Muslims alike devoted their time in studying Arabic. Christians essentially spoke Arabic, which was "often better than their Latin." 12 They absorbed the Arabic culture so much so that they began to be called, "mozarabs" a corruption of "must'arib" meaning the "Arabized ones." Furthermore, the Christian Priest Alvaro complained in the 9th century that Christians preferred to read Arabic writings and studied Muslim theologians and philosophers rather than their own. He exclaimed, "Oh, the pain and the sorrow! The Christians have even forgotten their own language, and in every thousand you will not find one who can write a letter in respectable Latin to a friend, while as soon as they have to write Arabic, there is no difficulty in finding a whole multitude who can express themselves with the greatest elegance in this language..." 13

Source:

11. Gibbon, E. Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.

12. Barrucand, Marianne. Moorish Architecture in Andalusia. Italy: Taschen, 1992.

13. Barrucand, Marianne. Moorish Architecture in Andalusia. Italy: Taschen, 1992.

 

Here you show your ignorance of history again. Research how easy it was for Christians or Jews to build places of worship, or do I need to do the research for you again?

Córdoba, on the other hand, had thousands of Masjids, churches and other houses of worship, spectacular gardens and paved, lit streets.

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yettheglobalist(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=3130"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yettheglobalist(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=3130[/url]

 

This is not about creating a safe society. It is about creating and attitude of superiority of Muslims over everyone else. It is about slowly making an entire nation convert to Islam. <----- Your country also wants to gradually make an entire nation fully embrace secular values. It's okay for me as long as it does not involve violence.

 

First you make sure that no Muslims can convert to anothe religion. If they do then you kill them. <---- Not necessarily

 

Then you allow Muslim men to marry non-Muslim women, thereby using a non-Muslim to make Muslim babies.
No one can force non-Muslim women to marry Muslim men

 

Sure it does. A low crime rate makes up for taking away peoples basic freedoms? I'll pass, thanks.

What is your basic freedom? It's not that you may not practice your religion, it's not that you may not marry those who you love .... all your personal complaints are insignificant and very individualistic ....

 

Ask a Jew which one they think is more advanced

Iran is more advanced because it is a Muslim nation! Unlike America, it is not built on secularism. It is called Islamic Republic of Iran. Many Jews and Christians are not into politics like you, and they love it in Iran as much as you love your America.

 

Most of them (Christians) are doing it for the economic reasons. That is not the main reason that Jews are leaving Iran. In fact it was mainly the wealthy ones that have left, many leaving behind their property in order to be able to leave. <---------- How can I be sure that what you are saying is not one the American propangandas? Coz I used to read news a while ago stating that Jews are quite happy in Iran despite all the controversial remarks from their president

 

Wassalam,

Yasnov

Edited by Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When you said this: Even if "perfect" Sharia exists, how long would it last? Even the rightly guided Kalifs could only keep it going for a short period of time <--- You are insinuating that you have kept your great system and empire going for a longer period of time than the Caliphate.
Your logic is astounding. I made a statement on how long the rightly guided Kalifs were in power, and you say that means I believe the United States is in its Golden Age. You read waaaaaay too much into certain statements Yasnov.

 

No, the article does not say that.

 

It says that about 40% of British Muslims want Sharia. To me that means the same thing.

 

Your empire may treat its citizens "well" at home, but beyond their own territory, they keep massacring people on a frequent basis and murder is the most heinous crimes.
You ignore all the times that Moorish Spain fought with its neighbors and invaded them. You ignore when it massacred large numbers of Jews in its own nation. How do you explain away the Spanish invasions of France?

 

Founded by the Umayyad Caliph Abd al-Rahman in the middle of the 8th century, Andalusia offered remarkable religious tolerance — very similar to what the United States has traditionally offered.

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yettheglobalist(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=3130"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yettheglobalist(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=3130[/url]

 

There is not one single thing in that article that shows the Golden age of Spain being more tolerant than the USA today. It only says that it was impressive for its time.

 

In a time of tranquility and justice, the Christians have never been compelled to renounce the Gospel and to embrace the Qur'an." 11 As a result of the tolerance displayed by Islam, the incredibly rich language of the Muslims became the official language of literature and scholarship in Spain for all by the year 1000.
And when it wasn't tranquil there were times when the Muslim leaders forced conversions on people, despite "no compulsion in religion".

 

Your country also wants to gradually make an entire nation fully embrace secular values. It's okay for me as long as it does not involve violence.

 

My country wants people to be able to practice their religion as they wish without the government coercing people to follow any particular religion.

 

First you make sure that no Muslims can convert to anothe religion. If they do then you kill them. <---- Not necessarily

 

Not necessarily? The fact that it is even any kind of policy at all is barbaric.

 

What is your basic freedom? It's not that you may not practice your religion, it's not that you may not marry those who you love .... all your personal complaints are insignificant and very individualistic ....
It's not that I may not marry those who I love? What exactly do you mean by that?

 

The right to choose my religion or lack thereof is extremely important. Noone should be forced or coerced by the government in any direction when it comes to such an important decision. You want a government that coerces people to follow Islam.

 

Iran is more advanced because it is a Muslim nation!

 

I almost had milk coming out of my nose when I read that line. So simply being a Muslim nation makes you automatically more advanced than any other nation?

 

How can I be sure that what you are saying is not one the American propangandas? Coz I used to read news a while ago stating that Jews are quite happy in Iran despite all the controversial remarks from their president

 

I am sure there are some that are happy, but the number of Jews in Iran since the revolution has dropped from around 80,000 to less than 40,000. These people are not leaving because they love it there.

 

Learn more about their situation before making such comments Yasnov.

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetjewishvirtuallibrary(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/jsource/anti-semitism/iranjews.html"]Source[/url]

 

The Islamization of the country has brought about strict control over Jewish educational institutions. Before the revolution, there were some 20 Jewish schools functioning throughout the country. In recent years, most of these have been closed down. In the remaining schools, Jewish principals have been replaced by Muslims. In Teheran there are still three schools in which Jewish pupils constitute a majority. The curriculum is Islamic, and Persian is forbidden as the language of instruction for Jewish studies. Special Hebrew lessons are conducted on Fridays by the Orthodox Otzar ha-Torah organization, which is responsible for Jewish religious education. Saturday is no longer officially recognized as the Jewish sabbath, and Jewish pupils are compelled to attend school on that day. There are three synagogues in Teheran, but since 1994, there has been no rabbi in Iran, and the bet din does not function. 4

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/Persian_Jews"]Source[/url]

 

At the time of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, 80,000 still remained in Iran. From then on, Jewish emigration from Iran dramatically increased, as about 20,000 Jews left within several months after the Islamic Revolution.[21] In mid- and late 1980s, the Jewish population of Iran was estimated at 20,000–30,000. The reports put the figure at around 35,000 in mid-1990s[24] and at less than 40,000 nowadays, with around 25,000 residing in Tehran. However, Iran's Jewish community still remains the largest among the Muslim countries

 

On March 16, 1979, Habib Elghanian, the honorary leader of the Jewish community, was arrested on charges of "corruption", "contacts with israel and Zionism", "friendship with the enemies of God", "warring with God and his emissaries", and "economic imperialism". He was tried by an Islamic revolutionary tribunal, sentenced to death, and executed on May 8

 

With some exceptions, there is little restriction of or interference with the Jewish religious practice; however, education of Jewish children has become more difficult in recent years. The Iranian government reportedly allows Hebrew instruction, recognizing that it is necessary for Jewish religious practice. However, it strongly discourages the distribution of Hebrew texts, in practice making it difficult to teach the language. Moreover, the Iranian government has required that several Jewish schools remain open on Saturdays, the Jewish Sabbath, in conformity with the schedule of other schools in the school system. Since working or attending school on the Sabbath violates Jewish law, this requirement has made it impossible for observant Jews both to attend school and adhere to a fundamental tenet of their religion.

 

Jewish citizens are permitted to obtain passports and to travel outside the country, but they often are denied the multiple-exit permits normally issued to other citizens. With the exception of certain business travelers, the authorities require Jewish persons to obtain clearance and pay additional fees before each trip abroad.

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5367892.stm"]Source[/url]

 

But there are legal problems for Jews in Iran - if one member of a Jewish family converts to Islam he can inherit all the family's property.

 

Jews cannot become army officers and the headmasters of the Jewish schools in Tehran are all Muslim, though there is no law that says this should be so.

Edited by Livius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your logic is astounding. I made a statement on how long the rightly guided Kalifs were in power, and you say that means I believe the United States is in its Golden Age. You read waaaaaay too much into certain statements Yasnov.

You said that you have more perfect system.

 

It says that about 40% of British Muslims want Sharia. To me that means the same thing.
The article didn't say they wanted to force it upon the majority.

 

You ignore all the times that Moorish Spain fought with its neighbors and invaded them. You ignore when it massacred large numbers of Jews in its own nation. How do you explain away the Spanish invasions of France?

When did it happen? What year? Btw, when Muslim was not in Europe yet, you guys were also fighting each other in Europe.

 

There is not one single thing in that article that shows the Golden age of Spain being more tolerant than the USA today. It only says that it was impressive for its time.

The article also says:

- Historically, the United States owes much of its economic and political leadership to its ability to integrate men and women of many different backgrounds into one nation. Many Americans seem to be forgetting that — and increasingly turning their back on the rest of the world.

- Even more striking, al-Andalus also allowed Christians to live side by side with Muslims and to practice their religion openly

- The achievements of Muslim al-Andalus were so great that the United States should be rightly proud to be seen as its heir.

- Yet, in recent years the United States has been edging away from tolerance and inclusiveness.

- In fact, the country’s other founding principle — purity and exclusiveness — has reasserted itself.

- No longer an enlightened, tolerant Andalusia, the United States sees itself more and more as an isolated city upon a hill.

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yettheglobalist(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=3130"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yettheglobalist(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=3130[/url]

 

And when it wasn't tranquil there were times when the Muslim leaders forced conversions on people, despite "no compulsion in religion".
When did it happen? What year?

 

Not necessarily? The fact that it is even any kind of policy at all is barbaric.

I meant they could convert as long as they keep it to themselves (at that time).

 

The right to choose my religion or lack thereof is extremely important. Noone should be forced or coerced by the government in any direction when it comes to such an important decision. You want a government that coerces people to follow Islam.
Your govt tries to coerce religious people to move towards being secular (non religious).

 

I almost had milk coming out of my nose when I read that line. So simply being a Muslim nation makes you automatically more advanced than any other nation?

You misunderstood. What I meant is that even a Muslim nation like Iran, an Islamic theocractic country, has given a thought about that long before the US has their first Muslim congressman.

 

I am sure there are some that are happy, but the number of Jews in Iran since the revolution has dropped from around 80,000 to less than 40,000. These people are not leaving because they love it there.
I can't trust your Jewishvirtuallibrary.... too biased.

 

Learn more about their situation before making such comments Yasnov.

Have you? Please read these quotes below very carefully, some of your American propaganda are exposed there.

 

A campaign to convince Iran’s 25,000 Jews to flee the country has stalled, with most opting to stay in their native homeland despite President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s Holocaust denial and anti-israeli speeches. But so far, despite generally being allowed to travel to israel and emigrate abroad, Iranian Jews have stayed put. Sources said that the majority of those who have left in recent years cited economic and family reasons as their main incentive for leaving, rather than political concerns.

 

HIAS declined to comment on its efforts to promote emigration, but some observers claim that the main reason Iranian Jews have chosen to stay is that they are, for the most part, free to practice their faith. “Iranian Jews have a comfortable Jewish life,†said Meir Javedanfar, an Iranian-born Middle East analyst now living in israel.

 

At a time when Tehran and Jerusalem trade barbs and threats, the 25,000 Jews of Tehran, Shiraz and Yazd attend packed synagogues, send their children to Jewish schools, buy their meat in kosher butchers and are even exempt from prohibitions on alcohol. This modus vivendi is the result of a compact between the leadership of the Jewish community and the Iranian authorities, whereby Jews are permitted to practice their faith as a community.

 

The situation for Jews improved in the years after the revolution, and Judaism is one of the recognized minority religions in Iran. Jews, Zoroastrians and Christians have rights enshrined in the Islamic constitution, and they each elect their own member of parliament and are entitled to worship freely.

 

Some criticism of the regime has proved to be unfounded. A few months ago, several conservative media outlets in Canada and the United States published reports claiming that the Iranian government had approved legislation requiring religious minorities to wear a distinctive sign, invoking charged memories from World War II. The reports turned out to be wrong.

 

“But Iranian Jews have a fairly vibrant communal life, and they can even criticize the regime within the constraints of the Islamic regime.â€

 

Both Maurice Motamed, the Jewish member of the Iranian parliament, and Haroun Yeshaya, longtime chairman of the Jewish Central Committee of Tehran, who have regularly criticized israel, nevertheless publicly condemned the president’s views, the latter in an unusual letter to Ahmadinejad, sent in February 2006.

 

“It might seem strange,†said Javedanfar, the israel-based expert, “but they can travel to israel and other places, come back [to Iran] and have a comfortable Jewish life, as long as they keep quiet about israel.â€

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetforward(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/articles/iranian-jews-reject-outside-calls-to-leave/"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetforward(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/articles/iranian-je...calls-to-leave/[/url]

 

And I also really suggest you to read these following links:

 

Jews in Iran Describe a Life of Freedom Despite Anti-israel Actions by Tehran

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetcsmonitor(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/durable/1998/02/03/intl/intl.3.html"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetcsmonitor(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/durable/1998/02/03/intl/intl.3.html[/url]

 

Exclusive: Immigrant moves back 'home' to Teheran

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetjpost(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/servlet/Satellite?cid=1131043721479&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetjpost(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/servlet/Satellite?cid...rticle/ShowFull[/url]

 

'We Are Citizens of This Country'

Citizens who, some say, have more privileges under the Islamic government than even Iranian Muslims.

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_hotzone.yahoo(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/b/hotzone/blogs2276;_ylt=ApzMTjY2RdGjGzEDHWEn_67u8wF;_ylu=X3oDMTBjM3FjjBzBHNlYwNibG9nLXN1bQ--"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_hotzone.yahoo(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/b/hotzone/blogs22...wNibG9nLXN1bQ--[/url]

 

Wassalam,

Yasnov

Edited by Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your govt tries to coerce religious people to move towards being secular (non religious).

 

the american govt? Verymuch hardly. Under Bush and the other 'american taliban', there has been a distinctive shift towards enforcing christian values upon the population, from attempting to put the 10 commandments into public buildings, pushing prayer in schools, to switching funds from secular agencies to christian aid services, forcing the poor to go to christian leaders for their essential services.

 

in fact, this change to a more overt christian bias (and implicit attempt to end america's constitutional secularism) is one of the main internal criticisms of bush's regime, and is deeply dividing (and retarding) the US.

 

 

i could also point out that the original label for OIL (Operation Iraqi Freedom), had the word "Crusade" in it...

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgawaher(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/index.php?showtopic=38772"]a good read.[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i could also point out that the original label for OIL (Operation Iraqi Freedom), had the word "Crusade" in it...

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetgawaher(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/index.php?showtopic=38772"]a good read.[/url]

 

 

Crusade is used by many English speakers to signify any struggle against anything else, people go on Crusades against drugs, youth violence, bad roads, etc. It means a worthy struggle in modern speech.

 

It has military overtones, yes, and a bloody history, but in modern day usage it also means peaceful struggle and a bettering of the self or the society.

 

Kind of like "jihad", huh...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You said that you have more perfect system.
That's right. I said the current system is better than the one in Spain a thousand years ago. That by no means is the same thing as saying that the United States is in the middle of a Golden Age.

 

When did it happen? What year? Btw, when Muslim was not in Europe yet, you guys were also fighting each other in Europe.

 

Which instance are you referring to? Muslims attacked France on a few occassions. How about the year 732 to start with, when the Muslims were repulsed at Tours-Poitiers.

 

Why are you so ignorant of your own history Yasnov?

 

The article also says:

- Historically, the United States owes much of its economic and political leadership to its ability to integrate men and women of many different backgrounds into one nation. Many Americans seem to be forgetting that — and increasingly turning their back on the rest of the world.......

You are wearing rose colored glasses Yasnov. I am still correct in saying that the author only says that Spain was impressive for it's time.

 

And when it wasn't tranquil there were times when the Muslim leaders forced conversions on people, despite "no compulsion in religion".

When did it happen? What year?

 

One instance: 1066, Granada - Jews are kicked out of Granada. Fifteen hundred families did not leave and they were all killed.

 

Also, in 1148 when the Almohads took over they told many Jews they either had to convert or leave.

 

Your govt tries to coerce religious people to move towards being secular (non religious).
No, it does not. It simply does not allow the government to push the people in one direction or the other when it comes to religion. All the religions have an equal playing ground, unlike Sharia which is a system designed to coerce people into becoming Muslims.

 

You misunderstood. What I meant is that even a Muslim nation like Iran, an Islamic theocractic country, has given a thought about that long before the US has their first Muslim congressman.

 

Jews are allowed one representative and no more. They limit their voice at the same time they give them a voice. How about other faiths in Iran? Where is the Christian representative? The Bahai representative? Both of these religions have more followers than Judaism in Iran. Yet these religions have no representative and are not allowed to have a representative. That is not advanced, that is backwards.

 

can't trust your Jewishvirtuallibrary.... too biased.
Ok then, here are other sources:

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/Persian_Jews"]Source[/url]

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetjewsnotzionists(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/iranianjews.html"]Source[/url]

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetla.utexas.edu/chenry/aip/press99/101799iran-jews.html"]Source[/url]

 

Even the source you cited says it:

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_hotzone.yahoo(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/b/hotzone/blogs2276;_ylt=ApzMTjY2RdGjGzEHWEn_67u8wF;_ylu=X3oDMTBjM3FjjzBHNlYwNibG9nLXN1bQ--"]Source[/url]

 

They all say the same thing. Or do you not believe your own sources?

 

Have you? Please read these quotes below very carefully, some of your American propaganda are exposed there.

 

Yes, read a bit yourself of what you have quoted:

 

But so far, despite generally being allowed to travel to israel and emigrate abroad, Iranian Jews have stayed put.

 

but some observers claim that the main reason Iranian Jews have chosen to stay is that they are, for the most part, free to practice their faith.

 

But Iranian Jews have a fairly vibrant communal life, and they can even criticize the regime within the constraints of the Islamic regime

 

And I also really suggest you to read these following links:
Yes, it was eye opening reading. Here are a few excerpts from your sources:

 

And while they say they don't face discrimination from their fellow Iranians, Jews here can't be considered for jobs as teachers, unless they are teaching members of their own community. Government jobs, even junior level positions, are also off limits.

 

Privately, there are grumbles about discrimination, much of it of a social or bureaucratic nature. Some complain it is impossible for Jews to get senior positions in Iran Air, the national airline, or in the national oil company. A woman teacher says she has been passed by for promotion several times because she is Jewish and now hopes to emigrate to Los Angeles. A car-parts dealer says Jews have to wait much longer for travel documents and exit visas.

 

Crusade is used by many English speakers to signify any struggle against anything else

 

In fact there is a thread under the General forums that is titled "Crusade for Fairness: Education of Muslim Children".

The most pressing complaint is that, despite many petitions to parliament, Jewish schools must open on Saturdays, the Jewish Sabbath. Like so many other Iranians, those at the Abrishami synagogue are relying on the new president, Mohamad Khatami, to support them.

 

Despite the declaration last week by Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that israel must be wiped off the map, the Shihab missiles displayed in Teheran with "israel" painted on them, the broadcasting of anti-Semitic films on national television and the much-publicized trials of 13 Jewish Iranians on spy charges, Ishak insists that life in Iran is far better for Jews than life in israel.

 

To avoid getting the Iranians in trouble back in their home country, israeli border authorities do not stamp entry visas into their passports. As with journalists, the entry visa is stamped on a separate slip of paper, which is later thrown away upon exit from the Zionist state.

 

Yes, these sources you gave do give insight on how Iran treats its Jews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's right. I said the current system is better than the one in Spain a thousand years ago. That by no means is the same thing as saying that the United States is in the middle of a Golden Age.

So, all of you US historical period, none is considered as a golden age? FYI, the term Islamic golden age is also given by your Western non-Muslim experts.

 

Which instance are you referring to? Muslims attacked France on a few occassions. How about the year 732 to start with, when the Muslims were repulsed at Tours-Poitiers. Why are you so ignorant of your own history Yasnov?
So, you don't know that European nations had been fighting each other before the coming of Islam to Europe?

 

You are wearing rose colored glasses Yasnov. I am still correct in saying that the author only says that Spain was impressive for it's time.

The author does not say that US is better than Spain either.

 

One instance: 1066, Granada - Jews are kicked out of Granada. Fifteen hundred families did not leave and they were all killed.
So, please prove it that they were killed by the state instead of by the mobs (as state policy). That incident was rare during Islamic rule as pointed out by Lewis:

Lewis continues: "Diatribes such as Abu Ishaq's and massacres such as that in Granada in 1066 are of rare occurrence in Islamic history <--- compared this with your US history with its repeated pattern of massacre (by the state). Source: Bernard Lewis (1984): The Jews of Islam. Princeton University Press. pp.44-45

 

Also, in 1148 when the Almohads took over they told many Jews they either had to convert or leave.

The Caliphate of al-Andalus was formally abolished on November 30, 1031 CE.

No longer united, al-Andalus fragmented into petty principalities for the next sixty years (1031-91

CE). The fall of Cordoba unleashed a period of political rivalry, but also cultural creativity in regional

centers, fueled by a rapid economic recovery.

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetiis.ac.uk/SiteAssets/pdf/andalusia.pdf"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetiis.ac.uk/SiteAssets/pdf/andalusia.pdf[/url].

 

The Umayyad dynasty came to an end in 1013. It was destroyed by Islamic invaders from North Africa, who greatly weakened the Muslim rule in Spain, splitting Andalusia into a number of statelets. But even splintered, Muslim Spain remained tolerant, enlightened and prosperous.

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yettheglobalist(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=3130"]you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yettheglobalist(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/DBWeb/StoryId.aspx?StoryId=3130[/url]

 

No, it does not. It simply does not allow the government to push the people in one direction or the other when it comes to religion. All the religions have an equal playing ground, unlike Sharia which is a system designed to coerce people into becoming Muslims.
Being a religious Muslim means being terrorists to your empire.

 

Jews are allowed one representative and no more. They limit their voice at the same time they give them a voice. How about other faiths in Iran? Where is the Christian representative? The Bahai representative? Both of these religions have more followers than Judaism in Iran. Yet these religions have no representative and are not allowed to have a representative. That is not advanced, that is backwards.

I guess your propaganda site does not mention anything bout Christian representative? Google Jonathan Betkellia, he is Iran's Christian MP. Btw, Zoroastrian, Jewish, Christian, and Bahai faiths make up two percent of Iran's population. Sunni and Sufi Muslims were also discriminated against in Iran. So, I failed to see your point. Baha'i is considered heretic and their religion is not recognized in Iran. They are considered as outsiders, enemies of the state, who supported the former Shah's government and spies employed by imperialist governments of the West.

 

Yes, these sources you gave do give insight on how Iran treats its Jews.

I never claimed that Iran is a heaven for minorities. So, let us get back to your previous claim:

1. Jews in Iran are moving out so fast that the Iranian government keeps putting limits on their travel so that they are forced to stay. <--- Is this a lie, propaganda or what?

 

2 . Most of them (Christians) are doing it for the economic reasons. That is not the main reason that Jews are leaving Iran. In fact it was mainly the wealthy ones that have left, many leaving behind their property in order to be able to leave. <--- Is this a lie, propaganda or what?

 

Wassalam,

Yasnov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't see anyone that has condoned such behavior,

Well Livius,

 

1. Some choose to condemn it (which are few).

 

2. Many will condone it and make excuses for these actions:

 

Like reports in some Western media, and some members here, who say giving Muslims what they ask for is "Aappeasement," or "love it or leave it," it's Just another way of telling Muslims that you aren't equal to us.

 

So before you start talking about the rights of non-Muslims under Shariah, why don't you address the injustice, Muslims face in predominantly Christian nations, and israel.

 

3. Other's will remain silent, because they don't want to rock the boat or simply don't care. As long as their hide is safe and satisfied.

so why make that comment Thezman?

Why shouldn't I?

 

Are you going to shed light on the plight of Muslims?

 

There are only a few non-Muslim members on this forum who have spoken out and defended Muslims.

 

Most non-Muslims here Just attack Islam & Muslims, and sweep their acts under the rug.

 

When Muslims shed light on what's being done to them by non-Muslims, they are immediately attacked.

 

Shedding light on my brethren's plight is my duty & responsibility.

 

Posting these articles about Muslim suffering brings to light what is being neglected by many non-Muslims. The fact that they are deliberately and unjustly targeted for inhumane treatment throughout the world.

 

And that's not the last article I'll be posting, Insha Allah...

Just because Muslims are being treated in such a way in some places does not make it morally acceptable for Muslims to treat others that way somewhere else.

1. Many non-Muslims in predominantly Muslim states have the same rights as Muslims, and quite a few enjoy more freedoms than Muslims.

 

That's due to the dictators who were imposed (and protected) on their people by some Western powers to guarantee their interests.

 

That's due to the dictator's clamping down on anything associated with an Orthodox Islam, while looking the other way and allowing the non-Muslims to practice freely.

 

2. Your above statement is sickening and extremely hypocritical, because you guys always fall-back on that to get away with murder.

 

Non-Muslims commit an act against Muslims, and Muslims are to be forgiving.

 

Muslims commit an act against non-Muslims, and non-Muslims have the right to retaliate.

 

What happened to: 2 wrongs don't make a right, and turn the other cheek? That you conveniently lecture us with when it suites you?

 

It simply is hypocrisy and double standards :sl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
however difficulties and restrictions upon moslems in the west is incomparable to restrictions upon non-moslem and minority sects within Islamic coutnries, and i would fight tooth and nail against the imposition of shariah upon a nation i lived in. Or any other, for that matter.

 

i should emphasise that the phrase "tooth and nail" is poetic imagery that could more accurately and literally replaced with "pen and keyboard", as a pacifist i beleive very strongly in disputes being worked out through dialogue and discussion, not violence. Just to clarify that point. :sl:

 

 

(you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetjewsagainstzionism(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/zionism/impact/iraqijews.cfm"]BTW Iran, Jews, israel.[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
as far as the jews are concerned , usually means an opportunity to be a victim.

 

fixed.

 

 

BTW, i posted (you are not allowed to post links yet)"you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_you are not allowed to post links yetalternet(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/waroniraq/19785/"]this[/url] a few days ago but it hasnt yet cleared the censors. :sl:

 

you might like a look, although i don't agree with the portayal of israel as (surprise surprise) a mere victim but more as a participant in its problems, the rest of the article is very lucid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, all of you US historical period, none is considered as a golden age? FYI, the term Islamic golden age is also given by your Western non-Muslim experts.
Golden Age is subjective term. You can use it however you wish as it has not bearing on the point being made. The simple fact is that people have more rights and freedoms today in the United States than non-Muslims did in Spain when it was ruled by Muslims. I don't care what the whitewashed version of history that you learned says.

 

So, you don't know that European nations had been fighting each other before the coming of Islam to Europe?

 

I know it very well. I was not showing my ignorance of Muslims in Spain attacking France though. You asked when it had happened and I showed you. Are you being purposely obtuse about this Yasnov or are truly not keeping up with the conversation?

 

The author does not say that US is better than Spain either.
He does not say many things in this article, it does not mean that they are not true.

 

So, please prove it that they were killed by the state instead of by the mobs

 

This is truly getting ridiculous. How deep does your denial go Yasnov?

 

No longer united, al-Andalus fragmented into petty principalities for the next sixty years (1031-91

CE). The fall of Cordoba unleashed a period of political rivalry, but also cultural creativity in regional

centers, fueled by a rapid economic recovery.

You asked for an example of when people were forced to convert and I showed you. Your quotes and sources have absolutely nothing to do with the quote from me that precedes it.

 

Yes, Spain was tolerant for its time. That is akin to saying the Model T is the epitome of technological advancement in cars.

 

Being a religious Muslim means being terrorists to your empire.

 

Obviously you do not live in the United States. There are plenty of successful Muslims here and they are not considered terrorists. You keep speaking of American Propaganda, but what kind of propaganda do you listen to that makes you believe what you said?

 

Baha'i is considered heretic and their religion is not recognized in Iran.
Great. In your reply you actually made my point for me. So much for your religious tolerance in Iran example you gave earlier.

 

Jews in Iran are moving out so fast that the Iranian government keeps putting limits on their travel so that they are forced to stay. <--- Is this a lie, propaganda or what?

 

You are correct, they have relaxed some of the travel restrictions. My examples do show that that they still have to jump through extra hoops to go where they want to, though.

 

Most of them (Christians) are doing it for the economic reasons. That is not the main reason that Jews are leaving Iran. In fact it was mainly the wealthy ones that have left, many leaving behind their property in order to be able to leave. <--- Is this a lie, propaganda or what?

 

I am tired of doing your research for you. How about you do the research and get back to me. Show me I am wrong Yasnov.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×