Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

Politicians like to say a lot without actually saying a thing. You just appreciate a yes or a no in many cases. Here are some closed questions for Muslims, which only require a Yes or a No. Easy I would say.

1.) Do you consider lashes for fornicators a just punishment? Yes or No?
2.) Are Muslims according to the Quran allowed to take women as war booty? Yes or No?
3.) Do you consider a possible implementation of the full extent of sharia law in European countries in the future as positive? Yes or No?
4.) Under full sharia law, are Christians treated completely equal as Muslims? Yes or No?
5.) Should insulting prophet Muhammed be punishable? Yes or No?

Thank you

Flying Dutchman wrote:1.) Do you consider lashes for fornicators a just punishment? Yes or No?
2.) Are Muslims according to the Quran allowed to take women as war booty? Yes or No?
3.) Do you consider a possible implementation of the full extent of sharia law in European countries in the future as positive? Yes or No?
4.) Under full sharia law, are Christians treated completely equal as Muslims? Yes or No?
5.) Should insulting prophet Muhammed be punishable? Yes or No?

1. Yes - as long as 4 witnesses are found who witness the act, and the lashes don't cause harm etc.

2. Yes - prisoners of war allowed, and indeed was the better alternative than slaughter in the past. Rape is not allowed.

3. Yes - if Europeans want to choose Shariah law in the future, why not? Europeans are joining Islam in greater numbers each year, so in future we may decide to go for Shariah law.

4. Yes. Christians and other religious minorities have full rights under Shariah, and indeed are excempt from some taxes that Muslims have to pay (Zakaat for example). Full shariah does not allow negative discrimination against minorities.

5. No. Blasphemy is not a crime in the Quran - and the Prophet, pbuh, himself never punished anyone for just insulting him.



Questions asked, questions answered. Compare that with the long list of questions left still unanswered by event horizon when it comes to Biblical teachings:

philosophy-dubai/biblical-confusion-t47353.html

Muslims aren't ashamed of their religious beliefs, but eh does seem to be uncomfortable with many aspects of the Bible.

Cheers,

Shafique

shafique wrote:Yes - if Europeans want to choose Shariah law in the future, why not? Europeans are joining Islam in greater numbers each year, so in future we may decide to go for Shariah law

Dream on! Not while there's people like me living and breathing. I don't know where these European muslims live. There aren't any round here.

I don't know where all the racist fellow English people live either - but I don't fool myself into thinking they don't exist.

Cheers,

Shafique

Booty is property as a result of plunder, mainly in wartime. An English person would know that.

Flying Dutchman wrote:Booty is property as a result of plunder, mainly in wartime. An English person would know that.

That kind of "booty" is haram in Islam war or no war time.

Flying Dutchman wrote:Booty is property as a result of plunder, mainly in wartime.

So you'd classify Israel's occupation of East Jerusalem, Golan Heights, West Bank and Gaza after the 1967 war as 'booty' then. I think you have a point.

But the answer to your question is still yes - women, children and indeed men are allowed to be treated as spoils of war - the alternative back then was to slaughter them. Enslavement of virgins is a Biblical commandment, for example - and many argue that this was 'what was done back then'.

Yes, it is allowed - but it isn't done these days.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:I don't know where all the racist fellow English people live either - but I don't fool myself into thinking they don't exist.

It's time you people realised that my country is a mainly Christian country and will remain so. I don't come to Dubai and start shouting for it to be Christian.

And you wonder why you get a bad name.

You really should take the time to read what is posted BM. Really - why do you keep embarrassing yourself so? Go back and re-read what I said, and let me know what gave you the impression that I believe the UK is majority Muslim, or that I'm asking for the UK to follow a law that the majority of people don't want?

Cheers,

Shafique

shafique wrote:if Europeans want to choose Shariah law in the future, why not? Europeans are joining Islam in greater numbers each year, so in future we may decide to go for Shariah law

We? Not a hope in hell.

I remember when you confidently predicted that Shalit would never be exchanged for Palestinian prisoners. A then the next day or so he was. Remember that?



Cheers,

Shafique

shafique wrote:

Flying Dutchman wrote:1.) Do you consider lashes for fornicators a just punishment? Yes or No?
2.) Are Muslims according to the Quran allowed to take women as war booty? Yes or No?
3.) Do you consider a possible implementation of the full extent of sharia law in European countries in the future as positive? Yes or No?
4.) Under full sharia law, are Christians treated completely equal as Muslims? Yes or No?
5.) Should insulting prophet Muhammed be punishable? Yes or No?

1. Yes - as long as 4 witnesses are found who witness the act, and the lashes don't cause harm etc.

2. Yes - prisoners of war allowed, and indeed was the better alternative than slaughter in the past. Rape is not allowed.

3. Yes - if Europeans want to choose Shariah law in the future, why not? Europeans are joining Islam in greater numbers each year, so in future we may decide to go for Shariah law.

4. Yes. Christians and other religious minorities have full rights under Shariah, and indeed are excempt from some taxes that Muslims have to pay (Zakaat for example). Full shariah does not allow negative discrimination against minorities.

5. No. Blasphemy is not a crime in the Quran - and the Prophet, pbuh, himself never punished anyone for just insulting him.



Questions asked, questions answered. Compare that with the long list of questions left still unanswered by event horizon when it comes to Biblical teachings:

philosophy-dubai/biblical-confusion-t47353.html

Muslims aren't ashamed of their religious beliefs, but eh does seem to be uncomfortable with many aspects of the Bible.

Cheers,

Shafique

Shaf, you write what appears to be the ideal of Sharia, but in reality it isn't practised like this. I highly doubt that Europe would ever become fully Islamic and take on Sharia law. I'm pleased when religion makes its way out of all government and legal matters in my home country and would never stand for religious rule being implemented. I can only imagine Europe under Sharia law - all of the statues, frescoes, paintings, fountains with naked bodies would be dismantled and likely destroyed because they aren't compatible with Islamic beliefs etc... The legal system that enforces equality between people of all races, religions, genders, se.xual orientation would be obliterated and replaced with a very restrictive and brutal legal system... It would be a huge step back for freedom and human rights. So many people have died for those crucial values and people would fight again to protect them.

FD wrote:
Are Muslims according to the Quran allowed to take women as war booty? Yes or No?
Booty is property as a result of plunder, mainly in wartime. An English person would know that.

In Islam humans are not to be treated as commodities, like wealth, ornaments and other valuable objects(spoils of war)..

At the time of war, islam doesn't allow muslim men to fight and kill children,elderly, ill/disabled ones and women..
But incase fit women fight against muslim men, instead of killing they are allowed to take them as captives (POW)...

Before Islam, during the wars between different states/tribes in various parts of the world, prisoners/captives were either killed or enslaved. The Islamic prophet Muhammad and many of his companions reformed the existing system of slavery by placing captives / POWs in the private custody of Muslim soldiers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_views_on_slavery



--- 1 seconds ago ---

FD wrote:
4.) Under full sharia law, are Christians treated completely equal as Muslims? Yes or No?

Yes, assuming that they are in peace with each other. This is what our prophet and the 4 righteous caliphs of Islam practiced.
philosophy-dubai/the-medina-charter-prophet-muhammad-t42298.html

Infact jews and Christians were allowed to be ruled according to their own laws and customs at their own courts and were exempt from obligations ordained on Muslims except a small amount of tax called jizyah

shafique wrote:I remember when you confidently predicted that Shalit would never be exchanged for Palestinian prisoners. A then the next day or so he was. Remember that?

Thank you for reminding DF what an obnoxious little man you are.

There aren't many who would use a son being withheld from his family for five years to score points on an internet forum.

Islam. The religion of peace.

Thanks again.

Booty is property as a result of plunder, mainly in wartime. An English person would know that.

That kind of "booty" is haram in Islam war or no war time.

What is the name of the 8th chapter of the Koran?

women, children and indeed men are allowed to be treated as spoils of war - the alternative back then was to slaughter them. Enslavement of virgins is a Biblical commandment, for example - and many argue that this was 'what was done back then'.

Really? Under international law noncombatants can be taken as prisoners of war?

Who told you this?

4. Yes. Christians and other religious minorities have full rights under Shariah, and indeed are excempt from some taxes that Muslims have to pay (Zakaat for example). Full shariah does not allow negative discrimination against minorities.

You're completely delusional.

Full religious equality under Islamic law has no basis in theory or history.

And non-Muslims payed steeper taxes than Muslims. This was proven by quotes from historians the last time this topic was brought up.

5. No. Blasphemy is not a crime in the Quran - and the Prophet, pbuh, himself never punished anyone for just insulting him.

Muhammad had a number of people executed for insulting him.

FD wrote:
5.) Should insulting prophet Muhammed be punishable? Yes or No?

Insulting,defamation,vilification,slander and libel are not acts of crime but acts of tort .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort

As you know there is protection of dignity in Islam. Since he is a prophet of Allah, it is inevitable that direct insult to him in person would damage the feelings of believing Muslims. So perhaps such direct insults will ensure some rights for Muslims, such as claiming damages against mental anguish pain,suffering or whatever caused.
If no end brought to these insults, by allowing such claims, than I don't know how one can sustain peace in society.
Otherwise, of course every individual has the right to criticize his message until they understand the validity of what he had delivered..

Berrin - I think that a society should have laws which dictate what is libelous or not, but I was answering from a purely Islamic theological perspective.

As for eh - interesting that he thinks he's a Muslim and answering the questions FD posed!

It's a shame he's still imagining the blogger-only version of Islam is the 'truth'. I think he does it just to make us laugh!

Cheers,

Shafique

FD wrote:
1.) Do you consider lashes for fornicators a just punishment? Yes or No?

Yes, I consider this a form of deterrent punishment, in case there is immoral chaotic situation where rape, promiscuity, unwanted pregnancies and adultery is taking place so much so that the very basic form of society "the family life" is being threatened in terms of unity, continuity, peace and happiness.

I guess we'll have to wait to find out what the 8th chapter of the Koran is called.

Is Google not working in the Bible Belt?

I guess your wait is just like we're waiting to hear from you over your numerous other topics you're confused about - such as the difference between a racist mob of EDL supporters and those supposedly rioting in favour of rapists, the meaning of a word you want to know the punishment for, whether you believe in Rapture or whether the Pope is the anti-christ etc etc

Cheers,

Shafique

Here's an interesting hadith on war booty.

We know it's accepted in Islam because the hadith is actually used as a proof permitting birth control:

Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interrupt us, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah's Apostle who is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist."

Sahih Bukhari 5:59:459

The moral dilemma for Muslims was coitus interruptus - not raping your captives.

That should say something about their version of ethical standards.

Instead of cutting and pasting from random blog sites, why don't you address the outstanding questions that you are avoiding.

I do actually want to know why you confused a racist mob with what you posted in the thread title - and more relevantly, all the questions about the Bible that you refuse to answer.

Bizare that you want to answer 'Questions for Muslims' rather than tackle the questions about the Bible. Why is that?

Are you ashamed of your faith?

Cheers,

Shafique

FD wrote:
3.) Do you consider a possible implementation of the full extent of sharia law in European countries in the future as positive? Yes or No?

Yes, the message of islam is not exclusive possession of Muslims only, it is a message to all of humanity..
You don't even have to be a muslim to be inspired by the teachings and laws of islam.

Berrin wrote:Yes, the message of islam is not exclusive possession of Muslims only, it is a message to all of humanity..
You don't even have to be a muslim to be inspired by the teachings and laws of islam.

You both are on different pages. What you are saying will confuse him more lol. Main point is, sharia is even not relevant, like any other law it there to improve the society. I'm the type of person who sees spirit more than letter of the law more important. Because if spirit is lacking then letter can be grossly misunderstood.

Berrin wrote:in case there is immoral chaotic situation where rape, promiscuity, unwanted pregnancies and adultery is taking place so much so that the very basic form of society "the family life"

Based on these assumptions, I believe Nouman Ali Khan (who lives in the US) calls American society a hiddious society. Unwanted (teen) pregnancies and cheating can certainly be a problem. Rape is not a problem in the West only, far from it. I can argue that most rapes occur by people from an Islamic background, at least in Nordic European countries, but there are other threads for that. So, including rape is out of place here. Unwanted (teen) pregnacies are certainly an area of attention and the issue is taken very serious and is deemed unwanted by society. Societies however where rape is considered a crime of zina and not the violation of an individual human being is more problematic. Where gangraped women are punished for adultery, where teenagers get lashed because they get pregnant. But hey, that's just like my opinion man.

And that is what a lot of discussions are about. Western lifestyle gets critizised for its excesses, which are considered unwanted by the majority of society. Islamic society gets critizised for what is considered desired by that society.

For the rest, thanks to those for answering the questions.

FD wrote:
Based on these assumptions, I believe Nouman Ali Khan (who lives in the US) calls American society a hiddious society.

Oww come on. Don't get your biases standing in the way of good judgement. Nowhere in his speech he embarks on a particular society. You shouldn't arrogate it to yourself or to any nation.. He points out direct problems arising in astray communities we are living in, so that he has reason to combat them under Islamic guidance. This is the reason why he is addressing large audiences, isn't it?

--- Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:39 pm ---

FD wrote:
Societies however where rape is considered a crime of zina and not the violation of an individual human being is more problematic. Where gangraped women are punished for adultery, where teenagers get lashed because they get pregnant. But hey, that's just like my opinion man.

Zina can be addressed both as crime and violation of individual human rights..
If you have AIDS and you go into s.exual relations knowing you will contract the disease, could only mean malice prepense cause you know that individual will die because of your sick intent..
On the other hand it is violation of individual human right. Cause everyone has the right to stay sinless, you cannot drive people to commit sin that they will be accountable for.
philosophy-dubai/will-the-wronged-ones-not-ask-for-their-rights-t43110.html

Talking to you is like talking to walls isn't it? because just on the other thread I told you that without 4 witnesses even a pregnant teenager cannot get lashed.(before and after pregnancy). Are you suffering from dementia?

--- Tue Feb 28, 2012 1:51 pm ---

Nucleus wrote:

You both are on different pages. What you are saying will confuse him more lol. Main point is, sharia is even not relevant, like any other law it there to improve the society. I'm the type of person who sees spirit more than letter of the law more important. Because if spirit is lacking then letter can be grossly misunderstood.

I agree with you, if you want to idealize it spiritual relevance just as important for full implementation of sharia to make it a success story.. However there is nothing in the way of pragmatism isn't it? where there is insufficiency of spirituality the laws will do the self checking. if implementation of one sharia based law will abolish certain corruption or crimes against humanity than there is nothing in the way of importing it. i.e. practicing capital punishment. which is common almost in all societies..
In the old days it was the work of priests who would defend such laws in the name of justice. In these days it is the duty of political parties/leaders as well as religious scholars...