Secularism is Kufr, Whoever accepts that evil is outside the fold of Islam

[abdulwakil]

Secularism is defined in the Webster dictionary as: “A system of doctrines and practices that rejects any form of religious faith and worship” or “The belief that religion and ecclesiastical affairs should not enter into the function of the state especially into public education.”

There is no doubt that secularism contradicts Islam in every aspect. They are two different paths that never meet; choosing one means rejecting the other. Hence, whoever chooses Islam has to reject secularism. In the following, we go in the details of explaining why.

1- First, secularism makes lawful what Allah has made unlawful.

The Rule of Allah (Shari`ah) is compulsory and has basic laws and regulations that cannot be changed. Some of these laws are concerned with the acts of worship, the relations between men and women, etc.

What is the position with regard to these laws?

Secularism makes adultery lawful if the male and the female are consenting adults.

As for Riba (interest on money), it is the basis of all financial transactions in secular economies. On the contrary, Allah says:

“O you who believe, fear Allah and leave what comes from Riba if you are believers. If you do not do so, then wait for a war from Allah and His Messenger.” ( TMQ Surah Al-Baqarah: 278)

As for alcohol, all secular systems allow the consumption of alcohol and make selling it a lawful business.

2- Second, secularism is clear unbelief (Kufr).

Secularism is based on separating religion from all the affairs of this life and hence, it rules by law and regulations other than Allah’s laws. Hence, secularism rejects Allah’s rules with no exception and prefers regulations other than Allah’s and His Messenger’s. In fact, many secularists claim that Allah’s laws might have been suitable for the time they were revealed but are now outdated.

As a result, most of the laws governing the daily affairs of life in the countries ruled by secular systems contradict Islam. Allah says:

“Do they seek a judgment of Ignorance? But, who, for a people whose faith is assured, can give better judgment than Allah?” (TMQ Surah Al-Maidah: 50)

Ibn Katheer said in the Tafseer of this verse that Allah is denouncing those who reject His ruling and accept other rulings that are not based on the Shari`ah of Allah. Whoever does so is indeed a non-believer. Indeed, belief in Allah can never go with the acceptance of other than His rulings in one’s heart. Allah says:

“If any do fail to judge by what Allah has revealed, they are non-believers.” (TMQ Surah Al-Maidah: 44)

From the above, the status of secularism and its relation to Islam are clear. But the ignorance about the Islamic truth is still dominating the Muslim’s mind. Most secular systems repeat slogans like “no religion in politics and no politics in religion” or “religion is for Allah, and the state is for the people.” Such sayings portray their view of Islam as a religion to be practiced in the masjid only, and that it should not be allowed to rule life outside the masjid. Furthermore, they try to deceive people with democratic slogans like “personal freedom” and “people governing people.” That means that people come first and no place is made for the ruling of Allah.

This is why secularism is clear Kufr, this is why secular systems have no legality and authority and should be rejected by Muslims.

[Debater]

Exactly, secularism is kufr and whoever goes for it is a kafir, jazakAllah bro.

[leela]

In a country like the uk, where there is a mix of people from many different walks of life, secularism is the answer as it takes everyone into consideration. People are able to practise their religion freely and they are able to voice their opinions.

[Saeed Al-Muslim]

In a country like the uk, where there is a mix of people from many different walks of life, secularism is the answer as it takes everyone into consideration. People are able to practise their religion freely and they are able to voice their opinions.Can you elaborate? The same could be said with the Khilafah, and that was a lot older than the defunct systems in the UK. In fact at least 1400 years older.

Kufr is kufr, it doesn't matter if it has a million and one perceived benefits. It is Haram for a Muslim.

Ma'aSalaama

[leela]

Can you elaborate? The same could be said with the Khilafah, and that was a lot older than the defunct systems in the UK. In fact at least 1400 years older.

Kufr is kufr, it doesn't matter if it has a million and one perceived benefits. It is Haram for a Muslim.

Ma'aSalaama

I don't see how people from different faiths can be expected to live under the laws of one particular faith. say for instance, do the shariah laws work for someone who is hindu? or vice versa..? with secularism, everyone's beliefs are considered, and they are all able to worship freely.

[Saeed Al-Muslim]

I don't see how people from different faiths can be expected to live under the laws of one particular faith. say for instance, do the shariah laws work for someone who is hindu? or vice versa..? with secularism, everyone's beliefs are considered, and they are all able to worship freely.
Hinduism is not comparable to Islam, one is a merely a religion, whereas the other is a complete Way of Life. If there is a need for a comparison then let us compare it with other ideologies such as Communism and Capitalism, both of which are strong democracies.

Islam is applied in two spheres, the private as well as the public. The public (i.e. secular) sphere is for all peoples irrespective of their background, race, political affiliation and religion. The private (i.e. temporal) sphere is only applicable for Muslims, where non-Muslims are left to practise whatever religion they are or are not from. Religions do not have any influence over the public sphere i.e. governments, systems, taxation etc.

Let us not forget that the Golden Age for the Jews was under the Shariah/Khilafah.

Ma'aSalaama

[leela]

Hinduism is not comparable to Islam, one is a merely a religion, whereas the other is a complete Way of Life. If there is a need for a comparison then let us compare it with other ideologies such as Communism and Capitalism, both of which are strong democracies.

Islam is applied in two spheres, the private as well as the public. The public (i.e. secular) sphere is for all peoples irrespective of their background, race, political affiliation and religion. The private (i.e. temporal) sphere is only applicable for Muslims, where non-Muslims are left to practise whatever religion they are or are not from. Religions do not have any influence over the public sphere i.e. governments, systems, taxation etc.

Let us not forget that the Golden Age for the Jews was under the Shariah/Khilafah.

Ma'aSalaama

The laws of Islam are perfect, but in the current political climate and the way Islam is being interpreted and applied by some muslims makes me feel secularism is probably better for everyone.

[Saeed Al-Muslim]

The laws of Islam are perfect, but in the current political climate and the way Islam is being interpreted and applied by some muslims makes me feel secularism is probably better for everyone.
My sister what are your grievances? Insha'Allaah, with a state, as in the past the Muslims will have to be a lot more accommodating for the difference of opinions that are amongst the masses today. Of course a more unifying thought could be established via the educational systems by the Islamic State, but it'll take at least a generation or two for the fruits to show. The Khilafah has been quite open minded, and very tolerant in the past, and not burdensome on its Muslim and non-Muslim citizens. But of course, those in power are only a representation of those who are under their guardianship.

Please do look into this matter, Insha’Allaah.

Ma’aSalaama

[Debater]

I don't see how people from different faiths can be expected to live under the laws of one particular faith. say for instance, do the shariah laws work for someone who is hindu? or vice versa..? with secularism, everyone's beliefs are considered, and they are all able to worship freely.
The way people from different faiths in the UK are living under the laws of one particular faith/group called seculars. Say for instance do the English laws work for someone who is hindu? or vice versa..? with Islam, everyone's beliefs are considered, and they are all able to worship freely.

You need to educate yourself before discussing this topic.

[Debater]

The laws of Islam are perfect, but in the current political climate and the way Islam is being interpreted and applied by some muslims makes me feel secularism is probably better for everyone.
This shows your ignorance about Islam whose information you receive from the 'propaganda service' and don't study Islam yourself.

[Cartman]

The laws of Islam are perfect, but in the current political climate and the way Islam is being interpreted and applied by some muslims makes me feel secularism is probably better for everyone.

secularism is just a gateway for people to come in(especially liberals) and break down all morals

[Cashew]

Secularism is defined in the Webster dictionary as: “A system of doctrines and practices that rejects any form of religious faith and worship” or “The belief that religion and ecclesiastical affairs should not enter into the function of the state especially into public education.”

There is no doubt that secularism contradicts Islam in every aspect. They are two different paths that never meet; choosing one means rejecting the other. Hence, whoever chooses Islam has to reject secularism. In the following, we go in the details of explaining why.

1- First, secularism makes lawful what Allah has made unlawful.

The Rule of Allah (Shari`ah) is compulsory and has basic laws and regulations that cannot be changed. Some of these laws are concerned with the acts of worship, the relations between men and women, etc.

What is the position with regard to these laws?

Secularism makes adultery lawful if the male and the female are consenting adults.

As for Riba (interest on money), it is the basis of all financial transactions in secular economies. On the contrary, Allah says:

“O you who believe, fear Allah and leave what comes from Riba if you are believers. If you do not do so, then wait for a war from Allah and His Messenger.” ( TMQ Surah Al-Baqarah: 278)

As for alcohol, all secular systems allow the consumption of alcohol and make selling it a lawful business.

2- Second, secularism is clear unbelief (Kufr).

Secularism is based on separating religion from all the affairs of this life and hence, it rules by law and regulations other than Allah’s laws. Hence, secularism rejects Allah’s rules with no exception and prefers regulations other than Allah’s and His Messenger’s. In fact, many secularists claim that Allah’s laws might have been suitable for the time they were revealed but are now outdated.

As a result, most of the laws governing the daily affairs of life in the countries ruled by secular systems contradict Islam. Allah says:

“Do they seek a judgment of Ignorance? But, who, for a people whose faith is assured, can give better judgment than Allah?” (TMQ Surah Al-Maidah: 50)

Ibn Katheer said in the Tafseer of this verse that Allah is denouncing those who reject His ruling and accept other rulings that are not based on the Shari`ah of Allah. Whoever does so is indeed a non-believer. Indeed, belief in Allah can never go with the acceptance of other than His rulings in one’s heart. Allah says:

“If any do fail to judge by what Allah has revealed, they are non-believers.” (TMQ Surah Al-Maidah: 44)

From the above, the status of secularism and its relation to Islam are clear. But the ignorance about the Islamic truth is still dominating the Muslim’s mind. Most secular systems repeat slogans like “no religion in politics and no politics in religion” or “religion is for Allah, and the state is for the people.” Such sayings portray their view of Islam as a religion to be practiced in the masjid only, and that it should not be allowed to rule life outside the masjid. Furthermore, they try to deceive people with democratic slogans like “personal freedom” and “people governing people.” That means that people come first and no place is made for the ruling of Allah.

This is why secularism is clear Kufr, this is why secular systems have no legality and authority and should be rejected by Muslims.

I'm sorry, but the above is absurd.

There are and have been secular governments whose laws make sharia seem liberal.

Secular doesn't mean "anything goes."

[AbuMubarak]

secular means that morals go

secular means that God goes

secular means that you cant teach right conduct, because thats preaching morality and morality is based upon religion and religion is bad (you MUST keep it private)

thus, the secular state becomes the religion, and people pay only lip service to God and religion, but they devote their lives for patriotism, and careers, and individual pleasures, without thinking of death, God, the hereafter

secularism is basically man creating the wheel again, without looking at the blueprint, thus spending years and lives bumping his head as he tries to get it right, but he will never get it right, because without God, there is no guidance, no truth, no right

[Skavau]

Secularism is not any of the following:

A Religion
A Philosophy

A Collection of Laws


A form of Government


A Way of Life


A Conspiracy


Secularism is not a collection of laws. Secularism is not a form of government. Secularism is not a direct result of democracy. Secularism is not a coherent philosophy. Secularism is not a way of life and it is not a religion.

Secularism is a political principle which asserts that the state should establish legislation separately or independently from religious rulings and religious influence.

Got it? I hope so.

[Abu Hurairah]

Secularism is a political principle which asserts that the state should establish legislation separately or independently from religious rulings and religious influence.

Got it? I hope so.
Even by this Scavianist definition it remains kufr as in Islam there is no separation between the state/nation and legislation of the Ameer'ul Mumineen by diluting/adding to/ or subtracting from the laws of Allah (swt).

We got it time ago.

No Thanks.

[AbuMubarak]

you need to stop covering your ears and saying nyah nyah nyah, because it is preventing you from hearing

secular, meaning NO RELIGION takes an active role in surpressing RELIGION and things that are related to it, thus it is an approach, a methodology, a concept, it permeates everything around us today, from gay marriage to abstinence amongst unmarried, to even putting the ten commandments in courthouses

you are denying the sunshine only because you do not want to open your eyes..........but it is there, whether you want to admit it or not

secularism is most definitely a way of life, a code of conduct, in manner in which a state and society embrace life

there is no right or wrong, there is only legal and illegal, and what can be legal today can be made illegal tomorrow

[AbuMubarak]

I'm sorry, but the above is absurd.

There are and have been secular governments whose laws make sharia seem liberal.

Secular doesn't mean "anything goes."

no secular doesnt mean anything goes, you are right

it means man makes up rules as he goes along

so its wrong for me to NOT wear my seatbelt, but its ok for me to smoke cancer causing cigarettes

its wrong for a man to have more than one wife, but its ok for two men to marry

its wrong for me to encourage prayer in a public school, but i can show them sex education (porn light)

[AbuMubarak]

The laws of Islam are perfect, but in the current political climate and the way Islam is being interpreted and applied by some muslims makes me feel secularism is probably better for everyone.
obviously you have studied NOTHING about the history of islam, either under the Prophet nor the companions who followed

yes, muslims may divert from what is correct, but at NO TIME is secularism better

[Skavau]

secular, meaning NO RELIGION takes an active role in surpressing RELIGION and things that are related to it,
What constitutes the suppression of religion, AbuMubarak?

Moreover, Secularism does not mean "NO RELIGION".

thus it is an approach, a methodology, a concept, it permeates everything around us today, from gay marriage to abstinence amongst unmarried, to even putting the ten commandments in courthouses
Do you think accepting homosexual marriage suppresses religion?

secularism is most definitely a way of life, a code of conduct, in manner in which a state and society embrace life

No it isn't.

Provide evidence for this claim.

there is no right or wrong, there is only legal and illegal, and what can be legal today can be made illegal tomorrow
What is legal and what is illegal is not a measure of morality. I have never claimed that and I am extremely pro-Secular.

[Skavau]

no secular doesnt mean anything goes, you are right
Correct.

it means man makes up rules as he goes along
No it doesn't.

so its wrong for me to NOT wear my seatbelt, but its ok for me to smoke cancer causing cigarettes

its wrong for a man to have more than one wife, but its ok for two men to marry
You are quite right. I have no grounds to oppose polygamy if I support homosexual marriage. I think both should be legal.

its wrong for me to encourage prayer in a public school, but i can show them sex education (porn light)
Sex education is for educational benefit. Civilised societies educate their children, not censor them.

[AbuMubarak]

your term "civilized" is a joke

[Skavau]

your term "civilized" is a joke

How so?

[Abu Hurairah]

The laws of Islam are perfect, but in the current political climate and
If the laws of Islam perfect and you truly believe this to be so then follow it wholeheartedly no matter the 'political climate' that may come and go and differs from people to people/ region to region, etc.

The Kitab of Allah (swt) and our Rasul's Sunnah has been preserved for all people in all times under every context a believer is in.

Only the foolish think that our Rabb somehow was unable to comprehend or was lacking in insight of the particular situation and phase in history we are in and thereby did not provide adequate teachings via the Qur'an and our Rasul (saw) and to prepare the believers of this time and the future that shall come.

the way Islam is being interpreted and applied by some muslims makes me feel secularism is probably better for everyone.
The Muslims who have scholarly interpretations and thereby follow, spread, and apply it are far superior than any who opt for disbelief or to a path of kufr.

[AbuMubarak]

How so?because there is little civilized in your world

[MPC]

I wonder why Secularism came about? Afterall if everyone was happy living under theocracies then we would still live under them today.

You wouldn't have that bothersome rule of law or have precedence that enables laws to move with the times. We would be able to get all our rules from one book no matter how far we had to bend the interpretation. I read many of the fatwas that are posted on here. Leaps of faith indeed.

[leela]

If the laws of Islam perfect and you truly believe this to be so then follow it wholeheartedly no matter the 'political climate' that may come and go and differs from people to people/ region to region, etc.

The Kitab of Allah (swt) and our Rasul's Sunnah has been preserved for all people in all times under every context a believer is in.

Only the foolish think that our Rabb somehow was unable to comprehend or was lacking in insight of the particular situation and phase in history we are in and thereby did not provide adequate teachings via the Qur'an and our Rasul (saw) and to prepare the believers of this time and the future that shall come.

The Muslims who have scholarly interpretations and thereby follow, spread, and apply it are far superior than any who opt for disbelief or to a path of kufr.


It's fine for muslims to live under Islamic law, as they believe they really are the divine laws sent by God, but it doesn't work for everyone else.
Sharia doesn't look too kindly on apostates and those who feel there is nothing wrong with indulging in desires that Islam forbids. You can't impose Islamic law on those who don't believe in Islam, especially if it interferes with their personal lives.

[Anonymous2008]

Originally Posted by AbuMubarak
its wrong for me to encourage prayer in a public school, but i can show them sex education (porn light)
Sex education isn't porn and encouraging sex education you encourage people not to have unprotected sex meaning less infected people.



It's fine for muslims to live under Islamic law, as they believe they really are the divine laws sent by God, but it doesn't work for everyone else.
Sharia doesn't look too kindly on apostates and those who feel there is nothing wrong with indulging in desires that Islam forbids. You can't impose Islamic law on those who don't believe in Islam, especially if it interferes with their personal lives.
I agree, it would be like enforcing democracy onto Iran.

[Abu Hurairah]

It's fine for muslims to live under Islamic law, as they believe they really are the divine laws sent by God, but it doesn't work for everyone else.
If only it truly was fine for Muslims to actually live under Shari'ah law in its totality (and please no we never wanted those pick and mix sham systems where its a quarter Shari'ah added with a pinch of man made domestic law stirred with the foreign policy of the enemy :rolleyes:)- lets be honest if one openly calls for Shari'ah or a Caliphate he/she is branded a 'fundamentalist' and finds himself on wanted lists arrested, etc.

The very mention of Shari'ah is enough for the secularist kuffar to get into a hysteric frenzy as was even witnessed when Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams mentioned in regards to civil matters in the context of Britain.
Sharia doesn't look too kindly on apostates and those who feel there is nothing wrong with indulging in desires that Islam forbids.
If our deen was to have looked kindly at the Murtadheen it would make no sense- what would be the point of being a Muslim and staying as such if Muslims gave out (nonpoisonous) candy to those who take the shahadah at breakfast yet by lunch time were kuffar once again?

Again its true Islam does not look too kindly at those who indulge in desires- but then why would it look kindly at those who behave like animals? Alhamdulillah our deen forbids the evils of porn, sodomy, rape, incest, bestiality, etc.

You can't impose Islamic law on those who don't believe in Islam, especially if it interferes with their personal lives.
Who here is calling for Islamic law being imposed on the kuffar that sleep around with anything that moves in their 'private lives'?

To be able to live by the Shari'ah ourselves and with the Muslim community is what we seek uninterrupted by foreign elements. Only if the kuffar for some reason wish to reside within a society whereby Shari laws are implemented will their 'private lives' be interfered with as the Shari'ah is holistic and governs the private and the public enjoining the good and forbidding the evil thereby would not permit haraam acts occurring on land governed by Allah's law.

[Anonymous2008]

Who here is calling for Islamic law being imposed on the kuffar that sleep around with anything that moves in their 'private lives'?

I think this was refering to non-muslims in countries that have Shariah law.

To be able to live by the Shari'ah ourselves and with the Muslim community is what we seek uninterrupted by foreign elements. Only if the kuffar for some reason wish to reside within a society whereby Shari laws are implemented will their 'private lives' be interfered with as the Shari'ah is holistic and governs the private and the public enjoining the good and forbidding the evil thereby would not permit haraam acts occurring on land governed by Allah's law.
Yes but for people who don't care for the faith of Islam why should they follow it?

[AbuMubarak]

sister

islamic law is not just about muslims, its the laws Allah has ordained for mankind, inclusive of dhimmis, atheists, pagans, christians and everyone else

[Novelist]

Secularism is purely kufr. I'm even amazed what all the writings are about? Are some ppl deniding this?

[Anonymous2008]

sister

islamic law is not just about muslims, its the laws Allah has ordained for mankind, inclusive of dhimmis, atheists, pagans, christians and everyone else

Not a sister, nor a brother. Yes but if you don't follow Allah that includes his laws and if you enforce laws onto non-muslims then that means there is no free will.
Secularism is purely kufr. I'm even amazed what all the writings are about? Are some ppl deniding this?

No one is deneying it.

[Salman Al-Farsi]

http://www.ummah.com/forum/showthread.php?t=168494

Good video lecture on history and future of secularism.

[AbuMubarak]

Not a sister, nor a brother. Yes but if you don't follow Allah that includes his laws and if you enforce laws onto non-muslims then that means there is no free will.


No one is deneying it.

that was for leela, not you

[Lord Summerisle]

sister

islamic law is not just about muslims, its the laws Allah has ordained for mankind, inclusive of dhimmis, atheists, pagans, christians and everyone else

Evening, Abu M.

You missed out an important part of that sentence-that you believe that it is Allahs law.

It therefore has no consequence to those who do not share your belief.

[Umm_Hanzalah]

All laws are imposed. People just differ on what should be imposed. Don't tell me people are actually asked if they actually want to follow a law? :rubeyes:

[Anonymous2008]

All laws are imposed. People just differ on what should be imposed. Don't tell me people are actually asked if they actually want to follow a law? :rubeyes:
Democracy I think they call it?

[AbuMubarak]

i cant remember one law that i was asked if i wanted

[JayC]

if secularism is identified as kufr [and yeh i agree it is]... how do muslims justify participating in the politics of a secular state... where all parties campaign to be the ruling party and make things halaal/haraam as they please...?

[Salman Al-Farsi]

Democracy I think they call it?

The problem is though, when you criticise and show how democracy doesn't do that people than argue what we see is not the ideal democracy. And we go round and round in circle.

[AbuMubarak]

Evening, Abu M.

You missed out an important part of that sentence-that you believe that it is Allahs law.

It therefore has no consequence to those who do not share your belief.
summer

while you were gone, we went over the constant mantra of "this is what you muslims believe"

well.........duh

you are on a muslim forum, and what you will read here is what muslims believe, so you do not have to post in every thread "this is what you believe" because we know what we believe

we appreciate you reminding us that this is what we believe, and since you know this is what we believe, then neither you nor we need to repeat "this is what we believe"

so as we talk of death, God, the Hereafter, heaven, hell, laws, etc, we can safely say that both you and we know what WE believe

[Skavau]

All laws are imposed. People just differ on what should be imposed. Don't tell me people are actually asked if they actually want to follow a law?
All systems of law impose authority to enforce the laws. To take a simple example - murder is against the law. The police will then use their authority to arrest anyone known or suspected of committing murder.

However, not all laws are authoritative or imposition by definition. Would you believe that refusing people the right to legally murder someone else is 'imposition'? We refuse people the right to murder other people on the basis of a collective purpose - it is vital for the survival of human co-operation and human society. To impose is to impose a specific way of life on someone else. To impose is to tell someone what they can and cannot do with their own life. To impose is to enforce someone to live their life in a certain way or by certain principles they have no reason to recognise.

Criminalising homosexuality is imposition. It is the act of telling someone else what they can and cannot do with their own life.

[Umm_Hanzalah]

All systems of law impose authority to enforce the laws. To take a simple example - murder is against the law. The police will then use their authority to arrest anyone known or suspected of committing murder.

However, not all laws are authoritative or imposition by definition. Would you believe that refusing people the right to legally murder someone else is 'imposition'? We refuse people the right to murder other people on the basis of a collective purpose - it is vital for the survival of human co-operation and human society. To impose is to impose a specific way of life on someone else. To impose is to tell someone what they can and cannot do with their own life. To impose is to enforce someone to live their life in a certain way or by certain principles they have no reason to recognise.

Criminalising homosexuality is imposition. It is the act of telling someone else what they can and cannot do with their own life.

Not everyone wants secular laws either.

[Skavau]

Not everyone wants secular laws either.

Provide an example of a 'Secular Law'.

[Umm_Hanzalah]

Fact is, Muslims have a different view from secularists on good and evil. As a Muslim I can see that homosexuality is wrong whereas a secularist like you can't. We don't believe that anything can be good as long as people want to practice it. Why should murder be wrong, if you consider homosexuality to be ok? Where do you get your morals from? If people want to behave immorally in public, then that makes it look like it's ok to do, so more people would do it. As Muslims we know that right and wrong are clear.

Homos aren't exactly contributing to the good of humanity by declaring their filthy ways openly. Why should they be allowed to promote homosexuality? This would have a detrimental effect on society with the population going down. Also, these people have no right to adopt or foster, they would cause serious psychological problems for children. Homosexuality is definitey not good for survival and it impinges on the right of society to be healthy. Not to mention AIDS coming from these people.

Also, why should only evolution be taught in public schools? This would only happen in a secular society, an ideal place for atheists.

Even secularists differ on what is right and what is wrong, what should be allowed and what should not, what is secular and what isn't. Not everyone agrees with the Skavau standard. Morality doesn't change with time (e.g. homosexuality was considered as being sick once upon a time in the West but now it isn't) as the basic nature of humans doesn't change either.

[Joha]

Criminalising homosexuality is imposition. It is the act of telling someone else what they can and cannot do with their own life.

Are you arguing practically or theoretically?

If practically, then there isn't a country in the world, including the secular and liberal west that doesn't 'tell someone else what they can and cannot do with their own life'.

We have laws imposed on us that govern how we live our lives, laws that govern consensual acts. So based on that argument there is little difference between the two.

If theoretically, then this argument is pointless.

[Skavau]

Fact is, Muslims have a different view from secularists on good and evil.
Yes.

As a Muslim I can see that homosexuality is wrong whereas a secularist like you can't.
My personal belief on homosexuality is that it is morally neutral. It is act which harms no-one and an act which no-one else has the right to intrude upon. You are free to believe that homosexual is immoral but you are not free to impose that belief on other people. Even if I thought homosexuality was wrong, I would still say the above. This is not just a belief of mine but it is at the core of what I would consider a free society. Personal choice defines a successful society. Personal choice is the beginning and the end of everything that we are. It defines and concludes the individual. If you remove personal choice, then you eradicate the purpose of a society. What is the meaning of a state that considers its own citizens subordinate to its own will or own purposes? Is the state representative of its citizens? Is it even considering its own citizens? Not at all, it becomes an illegitimate body of force dominating a large group of people.

To put this into perspective: If some government told you to stop being Muslim and threatened you with execution should you choose to defy this rule - you would likely consider that government oppressive. How is it at all any different in principle than telling a homosexual or an apostate to stop doing what they are doing - on pain of execution? You value your own freedoms in life. You value your capacity to choose. Do you value that same liberty of others?

We don't believe that anything can be good as long as people want to practice it.
Absolutely.

Simply wanting to practice something does not legitimise it. We look at acts individually. Homosexuality is neither good nor bad, it is morally neutral.

Why should murder be wrong, if you consider homosexuality to be ok?
An assertion that some Theists make against any ethics external from God is the idea that if no God exists, then murder is applicable or possible on the basis there is no authority to assert it. This is a misrepresentation of ethics. The above completely ignores all ethical considerations and invokes the reasoning 'I can so I shall' which implies that the individual has never considered morality beyond authority let alone considered it in this instance. This is not what any code of conduct, ethical consideration or moral ideology is about nor ever has been about. Morality is about concerning yourself with ethical considerations of a specific action or principle and then concluding from ethical considerations what is the right course of action. If you state that because I am able to I will, you are showing a line of thought associated it with wanting to rather than being right in doing so. This is not ethical, it is ego-centric. It is the perpetuation of doing something because you want to

Murder is wrong because of its consequences to life. It is the act of killing another human being. It is completely counter-productive to any given community. It is against all of our interests collectively and it poisons civilisation.

Homosexuality on the other hand is simply two individuals of the same gender engaging in sexual intercourse. It harms no-one and is none of anyone's business.

This is all pretty basic Libertarian stuff.

Where do you get your morals from?
I get my morals through empathy, understanding and cultural influence.

If people want to behave immorally in public, then that makes it look like it's ok to do, so more people would do it.
I don't understand your point.

As Muslims we know that right and wrong are clear.
Not at all. Much of Islamic morality is simply a series of commands. You simply follow the words of what you assume to be God. Much of the commands have little to do with ethical understanding. Growing a beard is considered obligatory for most Muslims - however it has little relevance in any ethical conduct. Growing a beard is simply a matter of personal choice. It has no value in the affairs of community co-operating together.

Referring back to your 'knowledge' that right and wrong are clear, you are in error. All you have is obedience. You deem what is righteous not through rational consensus or valued principles demonstrably reasonably but through the declaration of might. God is the ultimate force of might in your belief and therefore what God says goes. You are from this not interested in humanity, but furthering what you believe God has said in the Quran. You do not condemn things like murder, or theft wrong because they are intrinsically wrong in themselves - but you condemn them because Allah has told you to. This is a world view of effective moral failure because there is nothing moral about it. It isn't designed to be moral but simply to perpetuate what God says into the real world. It is a system of obedience based on the highest bidder, it is a world view where right is simply obey and where wrong is simply disobey. It is might equals right with Allah being the most powerful. It is arbitrary, infinitely subjective and at its worst - destructive..

Homos aren't exactly contributing to the good of humanity by declaring their filthy ways openly.
What constitutes a contribution to the good of humanity? Why is a contribution to the good of morality obligatory or important? We all engage in lots of things everyday which have absolutely no significance to the collective endeavour of mankind. I frequently listen to my music, play on computer games and read books. They have no input to the future of mankind.

Should me declaring the above be banned? Should be doing the above be banned?

Why should they be allowed to promote homosexuality?
Why on earth not? Freedom of expression grants everyone the liberty to promote whatever they want. Not contributing to the progression of humanity is not and never was a criteria for expression.

This would have a detrimental effect on society with the population going down.
This is laughable considering that we've never been so populated and homosexuality has never been so widespread. Your assertion here is just a myth.

Also, these people have no right to adopt or foster, they would cause serious psychological problems for children.
Provide evidence for this claim.

Homosexuality is definitey not good for survival and it impinges on the right of society to be healthy. Not to mention AIDS coming from these people.
You don't know what you're talking about.

Aids predominately effects heterosexual people.

Also, why should only evolution be taught in public schools?
Because Evolution is good science. We teach evolution in science classes for the same reason we teach Mechanics and General Relativity.

This would only happen in a secular society, an ideal place for atheists.
I would imagine that the teaching of evolution happens in any given society that values scientific progress and values the necessity of educating its children.

Even secularists differ on what is right and what is wrong, what should be allowed and what should not, what is secular and what isn't.
Correct.

That is because someone who is 'Secular' only agrees with the premise that any given state ought to establish legislation separately from religious influence and religious control. It says nothing else about any other of their beliefs. Seculars differ on what is right and what is wrong for the exact same reason that violinists differ on what is right and what is wrong.

[xris]

Are you arguing practically or theoretically?

If practically, then there isn't a country in the world, including the secular and liberal west that doesn't 'tell someone else what they can and cannot do with their own life'.

We have laws imposed on us that govern how we live our lives, laws that govern consensual acts. So based on that argument there is little difference between the two.

If theoretically, then this argument is pointless.talking about countries can you give an example of a muslim country you admire.is there such a thing as a perfect state?

[Umm_Hanzalah]

AIDS has only recently affected heterosexuals. It stems from homosexuals.

As humans we will never know all the variables that exist or the full consequences of every action, which is why Muslims get their morals from The Creator.

I don't think we will agree, so to you be your religion and to me be mine.

[Skavau]

Homosexuailty has only recently affected heterosexuals. It stems from homosexuals.
I assume you mean 'Aids' here. In which case, please back up your assertion with evidence.

As humans we will never know all the variables that exist or the full consequences of every action, which is why Muslims get their morals from The Creator.
No, you get your 'morals' from a book from which you assume to be of the 'creator'.

I don't think we will agree, so to you be your religion and to me be mine.
You don't really believe that.

If you did, you wouldn't say that homosexuality should be banned.

[Umm_Hanzalah]

No, you get your 'morals' from a book from which you assume to be of the 'creator'.


Believe what you want.

[xris]

AIDS has only recently affected heterosexuals. It stems from homosexuals.

As humans we will never know all the variables that exist or the full consequences of every action, which is why Muslims get their morals from The Creator.

I don't think we will agree, so to you be your religion and to me be mine.so you think that the biggest plague to hit africa is through homosexual sex.i think your sudanese brothers would oppose that attitude.can you blame all the sexualy transmitted illnessess to homosexual acts or secular societies,i dont think so.most of the nasty ills came when the whole world was non secular so bite on that bullet before the pain of honesty gets to bad.ive yet to hear of an islamic state that is the ideal muslim country that we can aspire to.

[Umm_Hanzalah]

so you think that the biggest plague to hit africa is through homosexual sex.i think your sudanese brothers would oppose that attitude.can you blame all the sexualy transmitted illnessess to homosexual acts or secular societies,i dont think so.

I recognise this may not have been the cause in Africa, as there is a possibility for other causes I'm sure, and I really don't know the cause there. But in A-Levels I was specifically taught about how AIDS in the West began with homosexuals.


[QUOTE=xris;2575334]most of the nasty ills came when the whole world was non secular so bite on that bullet before the pain of honesty gets to bad.

Again, your opinion. I'm sure you differ with me on what 'ills' are as well.

ive yet to hear of an islamic state that is the ideal muslim country that we can aspire to.

Well there isn't one currently. Don't worry it won't be long, I hope that we are both alive to see it.

[JayC]

Well there isn't one currently. Don't worry it won't be long, I hope that we are both alive to see it.

inshAllah...ameen.

[xris]

I recognise this may not have been the cause in Africa, as there is a possibility for other causes I'm sure, and I really don't know the cause there. But in A-Levels I was specifically taught about how AIDS in the West began with homosexuals.


[quote]

Again, your opinion. I'm sure you differ with me on what 'ills' are as well.



Well there isn't one currently. Don't worry it won't be long, I hope that we are both alive to see it.i have a problem when secular states are criticised for there mistakes and sharia is lauded but no examples of sharia states can be given as something we should aspire to.the main problem i would have is the same as secularlists have in turkey once its installed there is no going back except through revolt.when any human is given control of a country without recall to democracy it degrades and is not accountable for its mistakes.the only country that i see as majority muslim and is suitable for muslims and non muslims is turkey.apart from a few little problems they have reasonable goverment.why if secular countries are so bad do muslims flock to them in their millions. the muslim countries that have any kind of islamic state are riddled with corruption and ruled by demons.i do hope you do have your promised land but i think its a long way off.

[Anonymous2008]

i cant remember one law that i was asked if i wanted
During the 1940's women asked if they could vote, they then were granted the right to vote.

[Abu Hurairah]

I think this was refering to non-muslims in countries that have Shariah law.
There is no country which implements Shari'ah in full- I made mention of this previously so try to read.

Its best for you to stop thinking on behalf of others and start thinking for yourself (if at all capable).
Yes but for people who don't care for the faith of Islam why should they follow it?
You seem delirious, no one on this thread is asking disbelievers to 'care' for Islam.

[Anonymous2008]

You seem delirious, no one on this thread is asking disbelievers to 'care' for Islam.

No a few have suggested we should have shariah law even if we don't want it, so if someone doesn't care for Islam why should the laws be implemented onto them?

[Abu Hurairah]

No a few have suggested we should have shariah law even if we don't want it, so if someone doesn't care for Islam why should the laws be implemented onto them?
Again you're a tad bit confused- we want to implement Shari'ah across our own lands- Jazeer'atul Arab and majority Muslim populace countries insha'allah so that Muslims in these land (and others who wish to migrate or add to the Islamic State) can live under the laws of Allah (swt).

According to our deen on the blessed land there should be no kuffar (let alone kuffar military bases/ tourist nightclubs, etc)- so they needn't 'care' for it at all, this matter does not concern them and its best advised they keep out of such matters.

[Anonymous2008]

Again you're a tad bit confused- we want to implement Shari'ah across our own lands- Jazeer'atul Arab and majority Muslim populace countries insha'allah so that Muslims in these land (and others who wish to migrate or add to the Islamic State) can live under the laws of Allah (swt).

Actually it was said that the law of Allah is meant for everyone, but if you don't care for Allah or his law then why follow it? As you see, it's you who is confused.

According to our deen on the blessed land there should be no kuffar (let alone kuffar military bases/ tourist nightclubs, etc)- so they needn't 'care' for it at all, this matter does not concern them and its best advised they keep out of such matters.
I will discuss Shariah all I like. If we can't discuss Shariah then you shouldn't be aloud to discuss Democracy and other systems that actually work.

[Abu Hurairah]

Actually it was said that the law of Allah is meant for everyone, but if you don't care for Allah or his law then why follow it? As you see, it's you who is confused.
Of course the laws of Allah (swt) are for everyone- this deen is the haqq and was revealed for all mankind but the kuffar are deaf, dumb, and blind thereby cannot see it as such hence they don't care for it nor follow it.

See? You really are confused.

I will discuss Shariah all I like. If we can't discuss Shariah then you shouldn't be aloud to discuss Democracy and other systems that actually work.
Again you're confusion is yet more apparent- I never stated you or other kuffar cannot enter into a discourse on the subject of Shari'ah, rather Allah's law does not concern them (hence they neither care nor follow Islam) when it is Muslims who themselves are striving to implement and live under the system for themselves in their own lands.

In this those seeking to establish Allah's law should be left to their efforts for Allah's sake- no disbelievers should impede this.

So demo-crazy works does it? Since when?

PS. The word is 'allowed' as in permitted and not 'aloud' as in to voice openly to all.

[xris]

Of course the laws of Allah (swt) are for everyone- this deen is the haqq and was revealed for all mankind but the kuffar are deaf, dumb, and blind thereby cannot see it as such hence they don't care for it nor follow it.

See? You really are confused.

Again you're confusion is yet more apparent- I never stated you or other kuffar cannot enter into a discourse on the subject of Shari'ah, rather Allah's law does not concern them (hence they neither care nor follow Islam) when it is Muslims who themselves are striving to implement and live under the system for themselves in their own lands.

In this those seeking to establish Allah's law should be left to their efforts for Allah's sake- no disbelievers should impede this.

So demo-crazy works does it? Since when?

PS. The word is 'allowed' as in permitted and not 'aloud' as in to voice openly to all.be happy if you have it but dont decry secularism it only encourages disputes.choice is for the individual made substance by the state and not any imposed law.

[Lord Summerisle]

summer

while you were gone, we went over the constant mantra of "this is what you muslims believe"

well.........duh

you are on a muslim forum, and what you will read here is what muslims believe, so you do not have to post in every thread "this is what you believe" because we know what we believe

we appreciate you reminding us that this is what we believe, and since you know this is what we believe, then neither you nor we need to repeat "this is what we believe"

so as we talk of death, God, the Hereafter, heaven, hell, laws, etc, we can safely say that both you and we know what WE believe

Sorry, just go over that again.

:D

In fairness, I couldn't have known that you'd covered this, as I was on vacation.

[(*_Hamzah]

Any political ideology is acceptable to man, and the geographic’s are not important, if one wants to argue that secular democracy works in the west, and the average man owns his home, is entitled to free health care, he pays a fair amount of taxe,s and the quality of life for him is good, and there is no oppression in his country then I doubt he would be concerned about what system is implemented in his country as long it doesn’t affect his daily life.

The first condition for any form of government to take shape is there must be peace- if the Khalifah can offer Muslims this then it will be welcomed if it is an unstable state then the Khalifah will once again be a pipedream for Muslims.

[Anonymous2008]

Of course the laws of Allah (swt) are for everyone- this deen is the haqq and was revealed for all mankind but the kuffar are deaf, dumb, and blind thereby cannot see it as such hence they don't care for it nor follow it.

See? You really are confused.

This made me chuckle, it's not like muslims are the source of intelligence, this forum has enough proof.

Again you're confusion is yet more apparent- I never stated you or other kuffar cannot enter into a discourse on the subject of Shari'ah, rather Allah's law does not concern them (hence they neither care nor follow Islam) when it is Muslims who themselves are striving to implement and live under the system for themselves in their own lands.

this matter does not concern them and its best advised they keep out of such matters.
But if the law is meant for everybody why shouldn't concern us? Also Shariah violets human rights, so out of duty we should be concerned for the pointless suffering it endowers onto people.

[AbuMubarak]

if you want to speak ill of muslims, you wont last long

intelligence, as far as we are concerned, is not the ability to logically conclude anything other than the worship of Allah is our primary objective in life

the rest of that "intelligent thinking" is basically meaningless

so, the muslims here, and all across the world, since the beginning of time, have always had more intelligence than those who reject their Lord

[xris]

if you want to speak ill of muslims, you wont last long

intelligence, as far as we are concerned, is not the ability to logically conclude anything other than the worship of Allah is our primary objective in life

the rest of that "intelligent thinking" is basically meaningless

so, the muslims here, and all across the world, since the beginning of time, have always had more intelligence than those who reject their Lordpersonel perspectives can insult one or the other and what perpose does it serve.if you maintain that your laws which on many occassions was written by man after your Prophet died then you should be just as concerned to their validity or whether they are actualy gods laws or mans.i thought for the main stream such things as stonning are not laws implemented by god but by men so you should discuss what sharia actualy means for most muslims before you attempt at introducing it.praise your laws but dont state secular has no right to exist for billions of souls who demand it and for many muslims who chose to live under it rather than islamic dictatorships.

[Anonymous2008]

if you want to speak ill of muslims, you wont last long
I didn't say anything about Muslims.


so, the muslims here, and all across the world, since the beginning of time, have always had more intelligence than those who reject their Lord
This is quite a strange statement since the fact that the things that are going on across the world by muslims are far from intelligent.

[Umm_Hanzalah]

People who die as Muslims are definitely more intelligent than those who don't.

Why? Because Muslims will be in Paradise forever and the disbelievers in hell forever.

6. And for those who disbelieve in their Lord (Allâh) is the torment of Hell, and worst indeed is that destination.

7. When they are cast therein, they will hear the (terrible) drawing in of its breath as it blazes forth.

8. It almost bursts up with fury. Every time a group is cast therein, its keeper will ask: "Did no warner come to you?"

9. They will say: "Yes indeed; a warner did come to us, but we belied him and said: 'Allâh never sent down anything (of revelation), you are only in great error.'"

10. And they will say: "Had we but listened or used our intelligence, we would not have been among the dwellers of the blazing Fire!"

11. Then they will confess their sin. So, away with the dwellers of the blazing Fire.

(Surah Mulk)

[Anonymous2008]

People who die as Muslims are definitely more intelligent than those who don't.

Why? Because Muslims will be in Paradise forever and the disbelievers in hell forever.

6. And for those who disbelieve in their Lord (Allâh) is the torment of Hell, and worst indeed is that destination.

7. When they are cast therein, they will hear the (terrible) drawing in of its breath as it blazes forth.

8. It almost bursts up with fury. Every time a group is cast therein, its keeper will ask: "Did no warner come to you?"

9. They will say: "Yes indeed; a warner did come to us, but we belied him and said: 'Allâh never sent down anything (of revelation), you are only in great error.'"

10. And they will say: "Had we but listened or used our intelligence, we would not have been among the dwellers of the blazing Fire!"

11. Then they will confess their sin. So, away with the dwellers of the blazing Fire.

(Surah Mulk)

Being Muslim doesn't give you intelligence and if you ignorantly think so then you should question your own intellectual abilities.

[Joha]

Being Muslim doesn't give you intelligence and if you ignorantly think so then you should question your own intellectual abilities.

Plenty of people have their own definition of intelligence. What is intelligent to you may not be to me. There is no universal definition, and there is no universal way of measuring it.

There is something to be said for those people smart enough to recognise their Lord. It's understandable some people think they are more intelligent than anyone else.

I myself have two different measures of intelligence. One of those definitely puts those people who plan for the long-term and recognise their Lord as more intelligent than those who don't.

The other measure deals with intelligence on 'Earth', as it were.

[al faqeer]

Being Muslim doesn't give you intelligence and if you ignorantly think so then you should question your own intellectual abilities.

It does , those who are not should question their own intellectual abilities.

[Anonymous2008]

I myself have two different measures of intelligence. One of those definitely puts those people who plan for the long-term and recognise their Lord as more intelligent than those who don't.

Even though this is off-topic I will answer this paticular comment. Consider the possibility that God doesn't exist and you believed you were intelligent for thinking he did, then the tables have turned. :rolleyes:

Back on-topic saying that accepting secularism is evil because the Kuffar do it is to say Kuffar are evil. Which is incorrect (I'll explain more as i expect I'll get a reply for saying im immoral for not being Muslim:rolleyes:)

[al faqeer]

Even though this is off-topic I will answer this paticular comment. Consider the possibility that God doesn't exist and you believed you were intelligent for thinking he did, then the tables have turned. :rolleyes:

Back on-topic saying that accepting secularism is evil because the Kuffar do it is to say Kuffar are evil. Which is incorrect (I'll explain more as i expect I'll get a reply for saying im immoral for not being Muslim:rolleyes:)

Consider that God is the truth and when Your soul reaches your throat its too late for you to be a muslim :)

[Anonymous2008]

Consider that God is the truth and when Your soul reaches your throat its too late for you to be a muslim :)

Not something I'm worried about but thanks for the advice.

[al faqeer]

Not something I'm worried about but thanks for the advice.

You not worried about it now , but for that seconds your soul is at you throat you will regret you werent worried now .

Heres some advice , just cause your limited human brain ( In general ) cant comprehend God , religion , ISlam does not make it a hoax , its just a limitation in the brain of the one rejecting GOD .

[Anonymous2008]

You not worried about it now , but for that seconds your soul is at you throat you will regret you werent worried now .

Heres some advice , just cause your limited human brain ( In general ) cant comprehend God , religion , ISlam does not make it a hoax , its just a limitation in the brain of the one rejecting GOD .

Al Faqeer, if a student has no ambition to do well can you push him to study? No because he/she will not bother to due to no ambition. I have no use religion, in fact it's because of religion that some of my family is dead and my country is in ruins. I don't care for Islam, Christianity, Judaism nor will I can about my soul in my throat. I reject God, in fact I'm not sure he's there, so I will carry on to live my life as I like, as it was intended.

[al faqeer]

Al Faqeer, if a student has no ambition to do well can you push him to study? No because he/she will not bother to due to no ambition. I have no use religion, in fact it's because of religion that some of my family is dead and my country is in ruins. I don't care for Islam, Christianity, Judaism nor will I can about my soul in my throat. I reject God, in fact I'm not sure he's there, so I will carry on to live my life as I like, as it was intended.

No ones imposing dude , it was advice .

So happy gargling when the time comes .

[Spiff]

Any political ideology is acceptable to man, and the geographic’s are not important, if one wants to argue that secular democracy works in the west, and the average man owns his home, is entitled to free health care, he pays a fair amount of taxe,s and the quality of life for him is good, and there is no oppression in his country then I doubt he would be concerned about what system is implemented in his country as long it doesn’t affect his daily life.

The first condition for any form of government to take shape is there must be peace- if the Khalifah can offer Muslims this then it will be welcomed if it is an unstable state then the Khalifah will once again be a pipedream for Muslims.I think that this is a fair assessment.

The Caliphate did work as a system for quite some time... even if the political unity of the Ummah was over after little more than a century. However, as we all know, the system eventually proved unable to accommodate changing conditions, technological development, more complex economic and social arrangements, etc

The strength of secular democracy has always been its effective system (as they say in the US) of "checks and balances" and its effective constitutional system of allocating power and regulating access to it. This system has originated a strong commitment to it in the population, and the traditional freedoms (expression, press, political organization, economic initiative, religion...) have gendered an atmosphere favourable to scientific and technological research, investment and so on.

We are attached to this system because, by any standard, it has been a huge success.

An Islamic system can become attractive only if it proves itself on the ground, establishes a successful political and economic order and a well-ordered society.

So, the most effective dawah is not really to induce millions of people to read the Quran and study hadith "science", but to prove that the system works in practice and in our days.

Not very easy.

[Umm_Hanzalah]

Being Muslim doesn't give you intelligence and if you ignorantly think so then you should question your own intellectual abilities.

Well if being Muslim means a person avoids hell and ends up in Paradise, that is definitely intelligent. But then I wouldn't expect you to understand.

[Anonymous2008]

Well if being Muslim means a person avoids hell and ends up in Paradise, that is definitely intelligent. But then I wouldn't expect you to understand.

You should have read my previous post. Here it is:

Consider the possibility that God doesn't exist and you believed you were intelligent for thinking he did, then the tables have turned.

[Umm_Hanzalah]

If that were true, that God didn't exist, nothing would happen to us right after we died? But consider the possibility that God does exist and you die as a disbeliever and you end up in hell.

[al faqeer]

No ones imposing dude , it was advice .

So happy gargling when the time comes .

I already answered him sis :)

[RazielTemp]

Secularism is indeed a Sickness, which Rejects Allah Ta'ala and the law's prescribed by him, and therefore is not acceptable by a Muslim ...

:jkk:

[xris]

Well if being Muslim means a person avoids hell and ends up in Paradise, that is definitely intelligent. But then I wouldn't expect you to understand.so do you think a christian is intelligent if he obeys his scriptures and will he end up in the same heaven as you hope to or is it exclusively for muslims.intellgence is not belief nor is it faith. if you judged it on those grounds you would have to intelligently be able to convince non believers of reasons to believing. as there is no outright proof of any god it not possible to prove you are.im not saying muslims are not intelligent but you cant prove it through your ability to have faith.

[RazielTemp]

I'm sorry, but the above is absurd.

There are and have been secular governments whose laws make sharia seem liberal.

Secular doesn't mean "anything goes."

thats your opinion Cash, but Secular Governments were determined by Man-Made laws, not of the Quran and Sunnah of Rasul :saw: , so they are not acceptable to Muslims ...

Secularism does not concern itself with Religion, nor does it accept the religious Laws prescribed by Allah Ta'ala, so again it is Rejected and discarded by Muslims ...

:jkk: to my Muslim brothers and sisters and those who seek guidance from Allah Ta'ala ...

[xris]

so when can we expect the khalif to appear will ksa iran pakistan bow to its authority are all those that either oppose or do not assist the forming of the khalif evil and as kufr.

[RazielTemp]

so when can we expect the khalif to appear will ksa iran pakistan bow to its authority are all those that either oppose or do not assist the forming of the khalif evil and as kufr.

when a Khalifa is established Ever Muslim will be United under him, and follow him,

Indeed, those who oppose the Khalifa who rules by the Command of Allah and his Rasul :saw: are Hypocrites they will unite with the Kuffar/Jews/Christians who have not accepted Islam ...

[xris]

when a Khalifa is established Ever Muslim will be United under him, and follow him,

Indeed, those who oppose the Khalifa who rules by the Command of Allah and his Rasul :saw: are Hypocrites they will unite with the Kuffar/Jews/Christians who have not accepted Islam ...so you are talking about 90% of muslims this heaven is going to be pretty well empty if you take out all of them as well as the christians the budhists the hindus pagans athiests sinners all the kaffars.i hope you are not ever sinning and you are striving for khalif.lets be honest do think there is an outside chance and how do think its going to be obtained?turkey has a majority muslim population and they are secular are all those muslims doomed to hell?

[Anonymous2008]

Secularism is indeed a Sickness, which Rejects Allah Ta'ala and the law's prescribed by him, and therefore is not acceptable by a Muslim ...

:jkk:
Doctor: I'm afraid it's serious.
Paitent: What is it doctor?
Doctor: I'm diagnosing you as a secularist.

If that were true, that God didn't exist, nothing would happen to us right after we died? But consider the possibility that God does exist and you die as a disbeliever and you end up in hell.
Not the point.

[Skavau]

If that were true, that God didn't exist, nothing would happen to us right after we died? But consider the possibility that God does exist and you die as a disbeliever and you end up in hell.
Ah, the ever-present but ultimately bogus Pascal's Wager.

To paraphrase, what you are essentially asking if "What if you are wrong about Islam?" If I am wrong about Islam then I will go to hell. But then equally, I respond - what if you are wrong? What if you are wrong about Christianity? What if you are wrong about Hinduism? What if you are wrong about Judaism? What if you are wrong about Sikhism, Jainism, Confucianism, Buddhism, Zoroastarianism, Baha'i, Animism (any form - take your pick) or even Scientology? The objective reality is that everyone can be wrong about their beliefs. A contention of faith is not indicative of fact, nor an implication of evidence - rather all it is a standpoint of belief.

And you can only believe if you are convinced. I am not convinced in Islam and therefore I cannot sincerely profess to be a Muslim. By asserting Pascal's Wager (a man who was in fact, ironically a Catholic) you ignore the very basis for belief - which is to be convinced of a certain truth claim. Since I am not convinced by Islam, any threats of a cosmic spanking per Islam are totally meaningless to me as are the threats of going to the realm of hel as per Norse Mythology is to you.

The main flaw in Pascal's Wager comes regarding its truth value of proclaiming that believing in X has better results than Y. It is false. If the Fundamentalist Christians are correct then you will be burning in hell for all eternity. If even various Islamic sects are correct then you might be burning in hell for all eternity. Anyone could end up being wrong and consequently anyone could end up burning in hell for all eternity for their beliefs. So the premise of the argument is rendered redundant.

The reality is not Islam vs. Atheism, the reality is an infinite amount of assertions on what is. What is the best bet? To assert what you believe is true - after all, it is the only honest conclusion.

[Skavau]

thats your opinion Cash, but Secular Governments were determined by Man-Made laws, [B]
Secularism is a principle which asserts that any state ought to establish legislation without the influence or direction of religion or religious law.

But, ultimately every law throughout history is a man-made law. We are the pioneers of ethics. We are the developers of justice, rights and morality. It begins and ends with us.

[Anonymous2008]

And you can only believe if you are convinced. I am not convinced in Islam and therefore I cannot sincerely profess to be a Muslim. By asserting Pascal's Wager (a man who was in fact, ironically a Catholic) you ignore the very basis for belief - which is to be convinced of a certain truth claim. Since I am not convinced by Islam, any threats of a cosmic spanking per Islam are totally meaningless to me as are the threats of going to the realm of hel as per Norse Mythology is to you.

I agree totally with this statement. For someone to say to me ''If you don't worship Allah now you will go to hell'' is meaningless to me because I don't believe in Allah. It would be meaningless me saying ''there is no God'' to a Muslim, Christian or Jew because they believe in him.

We are the developers of justice, rights and morality. It begins and ends with us.
The proof of this is that justice, rights and morality has changed over the past few centuries.

[Spiff]

I agree totally with this statement. For someone to say to me ''If you don't worship Allah now you will go to hell'' is meaningless to me because I don't believe in Allah. It would be meaningless me saying ''there is no God'' to a Muslim, Christian or Jew because they believe in him.


The proof of this is that justice, rights and morality has changed over the past few centuries.A real dialogue is possible only when the two sides respect each other, and try to understand the point of view of the other. With some Muslims, this is possible.

With people who start ranting "secularism is evil", "Western society is wallowing in decadent vice", "you will all end up in hell", no dialogue is possible, quite obviously.

Strange way of giving dawah.

[Anonymous2008]

A real dialogue is possible only when the two sides respect each other, and try to understand the point of view of the other. With some Muslims, this is possible.

With people who start ranting "secularism is evil", "Western society is wallowing in decadent vice", "you will all end up in hell", no dialogue is possible, quite obviously.

Strange way of giving dawah.
I understand the Muslim view, as I was once one and can understand the perspective but it's sometimes hard getting a Muslim to see it from my perspective, so quite right there.

[AbuMubarak]

if the four of you find muslims and our perspective so appalling, maybe you should do yourselves and humanity a great service by no longer posting here

this is not going to become some kind of meeting ground for atheists

[Anonymous2008]

if the four of you find muslims and our perspective so appalling, maybe you should do yourselves and humanity a great service by no longer posting here

this is not going to become some kind of meeting ground for atheists

1. Not an atheist
2. We don't find your perspective appalling, we find it appalling you can't comprehend ours
3. It's not nice to twist words
4. Chill
5. It's not like you have anything nice to say about us so don't be hypocritical
6. Enjoy the rest of your day, sincerely

[Spiff]

if the four of you find muslims and our perspective so appalling, maybe you should do yourselves and humanity a great service by no longer posting hereOn the contrary, with many Muslims it's possible to hold a normal dialogue, because they respect our views, our culture and our opinions.

But you should realize how the attitude of moral superiority you always try to affirm does in reality much more harm than good to your cause.

It gives a very poor image of Muslims : as dogmatic, irrespectful, uselessly offensive persons.

[AbuMubarak]

because i dont put up with your nonsense, you want to blame me

we have ms robin, 34 years around muslims who were sweet and kind and respectful,

and she is still a pagan catholic

so much for niceness to the kuffar

whosoever Allah will guide, will be guided

i am not hateful or harsh towards you, i just dont play those footsie games

if you are an unbeliever heading to hell then so be it

look at banga or summer, both guys i personally like, and we fight all day long, but i will not deceive them into thinking i accept their kufr

[AbuMubarak]

in all honesty, you should be more worried why your heart is so averse to islam, than you are worried about my presentation of it

surely, there are some kinder gentler muslims you can befriend

but then again, you dont even believe in God or Hell

[Lord Summerisle]

because i dont put up with your nonsense, you want to blame me

we have ms robin, 34 years around muslims who were sweet and kind and respectful,

and she is still a pagan catholic

so much for niceness to the kuffar

whosoever Allah will guide, will be guided

i am not hateful or harsh towards you, i just dont play those footsie games

if you are an unbeliever heading to hell then so be it

look at banga or summer, both guys i personally like, and we fight all day long, but i will not deceive them into thinking i accept their kufr

Who on earth is Ms Robin? Have I missed something?

[AbuMubarak]

you are correct

i assumed when she said she was married to a muslim man, she was a she

but these days, you never know

[JayC]

you are correct

i assumed when she said she was married to a muslim man, she was a she

but these days, you never know

true that...

[Anonymous2008]

because i dont put up with your nonsense, you want to blame me

I think the phrase is: 'truth hurts'? I keep telling you how it is and you become aggitated. Let's calm down shall we? How about we both make a nice cup of tea/coffee and then return to the debate?


we have ms robin, 34 years around muslims who were sweet and kind and respectful,
Maybe you should behave like those Muslims then.


so much for niceness to the kuffar
Hypocritical once again. It's not like you give any reason to be nice when you are so disrespectful.

if you are an unbeliever heading to hell then so be it

Doubt there is a Hell, you can't prove there is thus it's an empty threat.

look at banga or summer, both guys i personally like, and we fight all day long, but i will not deceive them into thinking i accept their kufr
Oh so if you did we Kuffar should celebrate?

[Spiff]

if you are an unbeliever heading to hell then so be itExactly.

Just look at it this way: we are poor, misguided unbelievers headed for hell, where we will suffer atrocious torments for eternity.

Isn't this a reason for Muslims to be particularly nice towards unbelievers, so that at least we can spend a few pleasant years in this life, before the atrocious torments really set in ?