Originally posted by Khadir: Salam Brother Nur, This was the first i got a chance to see your response to my polygamy thread. Thanks for the all the feedback, i understand your position regarding the state of polygamy in Islam. However, i disagree with you on numerous points: 1) polygamy IS restricted in Islam, Allah allows polygamy on condition. Yes while polygamy was not restriced before islam came, but It became resticted by these verses of the Quran: [4.3] And if you fear that you cannot act equitably towards orphans, then marry such women as seem good to you, two and three and four; but if you fear that you will not do justice (between them), then (marry) only one or what your right hands possess; this is more proper, that you may not deviate from the right course. with all due respect brother Nur, the Quranic verses above on polygamy are in context to dealing justly with orphans of war, and other such societal misfortunes. And even as Such Allah is clear that monogamy is the more proper "then (marry) only one or what your right hands possess; this is more proper, that you may not deviate from the right course". Thus, polygamy is restricted in islam. 2) NO Woman can happly share her husband! thats just the truth. I will personally say, coming from a polygamous family, that polygamy is difficult not just for the wife, but for the children as well. In this day and age, polygamy has no place in islam, and in any society. :eek: A certain sheikh of the mosque in my community married a second wife, he did not tell his first wife, and when she found out in an insulting matter, she was ill for months. Being such a house ridden wife of four kids, she was forced to remain in this unhappy state, she never consented to this polyagmous marriage, and even if she tried to refute it, these extreme muslim fanatics around her would accuse her of denying islamic ways of life. A polygamous marriage is an awful thing, i wish it on no women. Many of these men who embrace their right topolygamy often forget the basic foundations of being a muslim such being honest, and not hurting others. Allah put a restriction on polyamy and those who practice it out of abuse will certainly suffer for their actions. Allah has allowed polygamy only where it is necessary, and when that time comes none shall question the purpose of this divine law, it is only when we subject polygamy on societies that cannot support such ideologies that we see it as primitive, cruel and outdated. May Allah guide us ALL. [/QB] Saxib, Can you give you give us references from the Islamic Scholars (1400+ worth) maybe 2 or 3 that support your view and your Taweel/Interpretation of the intended Meaning of the ayat. What Tafsirs did you refer? Amelia, Whether is Pologymany or Monogamy or Selfogomy, pick one and Stand by it. Don't critique the rest when you haven't tried them.

Salams, I see the Usual Suspects have popped up, all Young, semi-gifted and Restless. I just want to say that its an Honor to defend another muslim especially a learned muslim, Alhamdulillah. Jimcalee, JZK walaal

Originally posted by Azmaya: [QB] Girl, I feel you. They drive me nuts. I am not married, but I am in committed relationship with a wonderful guy and am close with his family. I don't plan on getting married anytime soon due to my studies, and he respects that and will wait. But, and big But his parents ahhh. He told me how they trying to convince him, to convince me marriage now, or else.... i luv them, they family but damn they all up in our business. And yes they will be up in your business, thats just a fact. Pls don't come on here and critique Br. Nur when you on here proclaiming proudly that you are in a 'non-martial' relationship. Just a word of caution!

Nur saxib, Pls do share with us the Proofs to the'Tolerance Statements' and the particular contexts that they were made under and the position of the Ulema on the Story of the Bedioun who didn't have to pray or pay zakat? For the average person, your statement can be taken as being supportive of someong not praying salat or zakat. Surely, there is a something that was said by the Ulama about this or else this can be used by any one that wants to become a muslim but doesn't want to adhere to the tenants of the faith.

The funny thing is that I've been to that country and its sickening apeing of everything westerner and the double standards for the muwatanees/bedouines. Walahi, that place is more dangerous to Iman then any Western land. Lavishness is in style there and where the people have FULL BELLIES, God is often Forgetton. As lucrative as it sounds to work there, its a purely Dunya move that most likely will alter one's akhira. It definitely Mimics Hollywood. I personally prefer a rural looking city like Al-Ain. Walahi, the thought of working there is very alluring and mesmerzing.

Do any of the nomads know of someone that got recruited for work overseas through a recruiment agency? Do you think that they are looking for a 'particular' demographic group? i.e. male/female, caucasian The pay is tax free.....student loans here we come. :cool:

I heard about this the other day on the radio... Court rules couple must agree on use of embryos By Dan Bilefsky International Herald Tribune WEDNESDAY, MARCH 8, 2006 BRUSSELS In a landmark ruling Tuesday that will reverberate in bedrooms across Europe, a British woman whose ovaries were removed when doctors discovered symptoms of cancer lost a legal battle to have children using embryos fertilized by an ex-partner who decided that he did not want her to have his offspring. The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg rejected the argument of Natallie Evans, 35, that her human rights had been violated by British court rulings that asserted the right of her former fiancé, Howard Johnston, to prevent her from using the frozen embryos. Judges in Britain had ruled that both a man and a woman must give their consent at every stage of the in vitro fertilization process, including the storage and implantation of fertilized eggs. The European court upheld these rulings, arguing that even in such exceptional circumstances as Evans's, the right to have a family - enshrined in Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights - could not override Johnston's withdrawal of his consent. The court said that it was up to national law to define when the right to life began and that under British law an embryo did not have an independent right to life. Legal and medical experts said that although there was still no clear common ground in Europe on the issues raised by the Evans case, the ruling gave credence to the principle that parental rights trump those of the embryos they create. They said it also helped solidify the principle that both parents must consent before an embryo can be used. Dr. Michael Wilks, chairman of the British Medical Association's ethics committee, said, however, that the patchwork of legal and medical regulations in Europe meant that the ruling should not be construed as a precedent. "A British fetus would not be considered in the same way as an Italian fetus might be considered," he said. But he added that the case raised the global issue of what safeguards should be maintained by in vitro fertilization programs in the event that relations between partners sour. The case began in 2000 when Evans and Johnston sought fertility treatment in Bath, southwest England. Evans had been diagnosed with a pre-cancerous condition of her ovaries. Before having her ovaries removed, she and Johnston undertook in vitro fertilization and created six embryos that were frozen for storage. The embryos are the only remaining hope of motherhood for Evans. But months later, when Evans and Johnston separated, he withdrew his consent for the embryos to be used, arguing that he wanted neither the emotional nor the financial responsibility of being father to a child he would not raise. Evans appealed to the British courts to allow her to use the embryos, arguing that Johnston's failure to grant his permission violated her right to a family life and the embryos' right to life. She further contended that the refusal to grant her use of the embryos discriminated against her in comparison to women who can conceive naturally, since their male partners cannot withdraw consent to birth once the embryo is created. But Britain's Court of Appeals ruled against her in 2004, saying that both partners had to agree before embryos were used and that an ex-fiancé was entitled to withdraw his or her consent before implantation. Speaking after the ruling, Evans said she was disappointed and would appeal. "Please, Howard, just think about what you are doing to me," she said. Johnston said in a news conference broadcast on Sky that he felt "nothing." "The key thing for me was just to be able to decide when, and if, I would start a family," he said. Wilks said he had sympathy for Evans's plight. But he added: "We believe it is crucial that both partners have given their permission to become parents before frozen embryos are used." The European Court of Human Rights rules on violations of the European Convention on Human Rights. Governments that signed the convention guarantee their citizens basic standards of civil liberties. Source

Don't we often assume that the the 'Husband' in these situations is Guilty until Proven Innocent. I think that we live in a pro-fem culture and times which propagates these attitudes. These attitudes and prejudices have changed the defined roles of husband and wife. The Victim has to be Saved at ALL COSTS. No matter if the family is broken up, broken apart etc. The children's mental well being is never prioritized in these domestic situations. Domestic disputes are no longer mediated but rather litigated. P.S. I am tired and severly lacking sleep, so excuse any mistakes in my writing.

Someone 'Sober' me up....cause ALL i see in Dubai is $$$$$$$ These are Tax free dollars-right? Do they still give u a housing/housing allowance?

I thought that this was appropriate seeing how some SOL members have decided to take on that role.

How to be a Muslim reformer After reading an article on Wafa Sultan (the up-and-coming Muslim reformer) in the New York Times today, it occured to me that I should get on this reformer bandwagon before the market gets saturated. I'm articulate, telegenic, exotic (yet oh so fluffy and Westernized), not to mention female (oppressed by rigid Islamic paternalism, naturally). Too bad I've got so many other little schemes on the go and can't spare the time for this one. However, I've written a handy little guide for aspiring refuseniks, male or female, Muslim or non-Muslim. Hopefully it will inspire readers to lead the charge in enlightening the benighted Islamic world. 1. Keep it simple First and foremost, don't bother actually studying the religion or recent MENA history. Take a page from Pundita's book: no need for research when you're painting with a really big brush. If you absolutely must research, this site is a treasure trove of convenient black and white stereotyping. 2. Have an angle Find or manufacture a useful "turning point" in your life that made you realize Islam was a bigoted and/or violent religion. In Irshad Manji's case, it was being kicked out of her madrasa for demanding proof of a Jewish conspiracy. For Wafa Sultan, it was watching the Muslim Brotherhood kill a professor at her university in Aleppo. Of course, it's helpful not to mention Hafez Assad's response. I recall Irshad was all for Emergency Law in Egypt because Naguib Mahfouz was roughed up by some Islamist thugs: "Excuse me, but if that's a reason to maim (and possibly kill), it's equally a reason for security forces to crack down on the thugs. Bring on the Emergency Law" (128). Ahem, moving on... 3. Write a book Start holding interviews just prior to (or immediately after) publishing a book that claims to spearhead a reform movement and/or turn the Islamic world on its head. Tell the NYT that the working title is The Escaped Prisoner: When God Is a Monster, because The Trouble with Islam Today is simply too namby-pamby. 4. Become a Western media darling Be extremely provocative. Make rude statements about Islam and those who follow it. Make sure to have an itemized list of every horrible act commited by Muslims, rulers of Muslim-majority countries, Caliphs, etc. Make fun of Arabs and how childish and barbaric they are compared to Jews and Christians (or in Irshad's case, go one step further and blame everything on the "Arabization" of Islam. Don't bother to mention any similar acts carried out in the name of other Abrahamic religions or even atheist ideologies, such as Communism. This is supposed to be an indictment against Islam, not the vile predictability of human nature and perverse incentives. 5. Remind people that you are constantly under siege Make sure the media is fully aware of every single death threat you receive as a result of the aforementioned provocative statements. If you're lucky, some wacko will release a fatwa that demands you be stoned, beheaded or strung up in some elaborate medieval way. 6. Rake in the cash Watch as speaking invitations roll in from hardline right-wing Israeli and US organizations. No, it's not a Jewish conspiracy, but for some odd reason they are in full agreement with your views on Islamic reform. You're definitely on the way to winning Muslim hearts and minds if they're supporting you! 7. Remember your audience Don't bother engaging Muslims in a respectful yet frank discussion on how to remain faithful to the Prophet's message in our modern, globalized, polarized, terrorized world. You don't even need to talk to Muslims, unless it's to get the extremists frothing at the mouth. Being a true visionary is hard work and requires far too much study, which leaves you hardly any time for gala dinners with pretentious, xenophobic ultra-liberal or ultra-conservative (really, does it matter?) activists who will praise you as a model Muslim making a real difference in the Islamic world. How to be a Muslim Reformer

Back to the topic, per original post Who does Wafa Sultan think she's fooling? The criminal neocon blogosphere is abuzz with praise of some tool named "Wafa Sultan." So what did this Arab-American psychologist( currently unemployed and hunting for a residency at the ripe age of 47) with delusions of granduer do to earn such heart warming approval from the usual suspects? Well, theres an Al-Jazeera video clip recently put out by MEMRI(an Israeli disinformation front which (mis)translates selected articles from the Arab media) showing Sultan taking on some big bad Algerian "Islamist." I noticed that the MEMRI clip edited out any responce by the opposition(which reportedly trashed her), so all we have a few minutes of Sultan essentially bloviating the failed neocon narrative. Predictably the right wing septic sewer is ecstatic. Wafa Sultan's spurious posturing was just the bone these rabid chihuahuas needed. What about those death threats she claims to have received? Do you want to see my inbox? You want to see someone with courage? Look no further then Cindy Sheehan. Looking for a gallon of gravitas? Try George Galloway bringing it on in the US senate. Thats the mendacious magic ticket to stardom folks. Simply regurjitate recycled horse manure which finds currency amongst the most racist, reactionary, uninformed, unintelligent and yes, criminal elements of the neocon malignancy, right, left and center. Facts as usual need never apply. Its become the favored tactic of the usual suspects to roll out charlatans with Muslim names to lend credibility to anti-Muslim propaganda and misinformation(sort of like Ward Connerly of anti-affirmative action fame). Sultan, like Manji and co. isnt a Muslim but an athiest, just like As'ad AbuKhalil. Difference is AbuKhalil isnt an opportunistic liar, nor does he play to anyone else's tune which is why you wont see him on MSM or receiving accolades from disingenuous dirt. Look out for the sycophantic Sultan in the coming days and weeks, just follow the 15 minute slime trail. Wheres Muhammed Ali Hasan when you need him? Wafa the CLOWN

Dr Evan Harris MP, Liberal Democrat human rights spokesman, will be joined by women's rights campaigner Maryam Namazie and Keith Porteous Wood, of the National Secular Society, to speak at the rally. and they say it ain't a Anti-Muslim rally...who they kidding.

This all reminds me of the hadith that indicates that the Dunya is the Prison of the Believer and the Jannah of the NonBeliever/Kafir. Caught btwn a rock and a hardplace, as the saying goes.

Originally posted by ibtisam: i repeat Read the thread properly, I know you wanted the conclusion to be that everyone liked Islam best and found it the easiest to follow. But the result went the other way, and that’s does not take anything away from Islam, maybe it was not explained or most probably as the findings suggest people liked religions which did not impose on them a whole new way of life, (i.e. ones that do not change your life or have an impact on it) it is therefore logical that Islam, Judaism will get the lowest results, as they govern your whole daily life, from what you wear, to eating and everything else. I agree with you on your comments that I just quoted. Inshallah, in the near future be a little gentler to the BROTHERS because at times-They agree with you and are on your side, walaaal.

Originally posted by ibtisam: ^^ no, you can put your sword away long enough to read it fully. it is a report!! and the conclusion of a study, don't try and read too much into everything. sometimes there are no hidden agendas and no one is ridiculing anything. cheers SB: really now, God forbid anyone is taht lost Proof that it is satirical in nature Catholicism A close second, it nearly did as good as Christianity, if it not for a few confusing ritualistic beliefs. The tribesmen enjoyed the Pope, after we were able to show them rare footage of His Holiness giving Easter Mass in the Aboriginal language of drum thumping. Hinduism This was a distant third. Most tribesmen had a difficult time comprehending the perpetual birth and rebirth concept. Majority of the tribesmen also found the movie Gandhi to be way too long, with Candice Bergen’s performance substandard and trite. Our panelists attempting to play with a Dreidel during their evaluation of Judaism. Buddhism Buddhism did not fare well among the tribesmen. Most found the notion of Buddha as god, not to be credible. With many questioning how can a god control the world, when he can’t even control his weight? Most of the tribesmen preferred Jesus who had a slender and slightly muscular body. Muslim Although not very popular it did appeal to a few of the aborigines. Ironically the few tribesmen who chose the Muslim religion soon got into an altercation with those who preferred Judaism. The dispute was over the territorial right of the grass hut in which they were living. The tribesmen who choose the Muslim religion claimed they were in it first. Judaism This religion was very confusing to most. From proper attire, ritualistic conduct, and Kosher food, left most of the aborigines baffled and perplexed. With one of the tribesmen eating a Dreidel out of confusion.

Is this Satire?

Originally posted by xiinfaniin: ^^Except the holes in his argument are too big to be covered by your bare hands . You see, it is quite an incongruous notion for one to claim to have a faith whose fundamental principles he has to yet agree with. On a one hand SB, the man whose stand you loudly celebrated, asserts that he is a follower of Islam and that he complies with its directives. But On the other hand he objects to the very tenets he confessed to have believed! He believes the Qur’an but does not believe the shariicah! He believes the prophet but not his Sunnah! He believes Allah but not His claim that He created man! That’s preposterous (is it not?) and untenable stand to make. Most people, I believe, would agree with such assessment. While a contradictory statement needs not be rebutted, as it contains perfect incoherent prepositions that could barely survive, to spot it, remove its pseudo-intellectual gown, and spoil the sport of clapping for its empty loom is too tempting a opportunity for me to pass up. Inconsistency, good friends, is a curse, which the charlatans of this site are seemingly inflicted by, and it does not deserve to be showered with praise. Think about it a bit more and bonder, I say.

MashaAllah, Despite all the efforts that the world's leading stooges have put into 'liberalizing' Afghanistanistaan, this still occurs-ALHAMDULILLAH. The majority of afghanis still have respect for the Shariah and unlike some on here, wouldn't DARE to question its authority. Ahura, Shariah gets its source from Quran and Sunnah which are both Diven Sources. Hence, making Shariah = DIVINE LAW. Why else did the Rasul (salallahu caliyhe) spend 23yrs delineating the Shariah to us and then the Ulama have elucidated on the Rasul (salallahu caliyhe) and his sahaba's application of the Shariah. Johnny, No Complusion in Religion is for those that are Ahl-al-kitab (People of the book) that pay Jaziyah (tax for living in shariah land, while you are an 'Ahl al Kitabi'. You have to be 'born' as an 'Ahl-al Kitabi' and not a 'convert' from Islam to Christainty. The Ulama are Unanimous on this. (If you read the Quranic explanations/TAFASIR books, you would know this.) If you leave ISLAM and become a Christian or anything else, you become an Apostate and there is no ambiguity about it. Ibitisam, A MUSLIM does not EQUAL a NON-MUSLIM. I think that as time goes, we start to think of ourselves as being EQUAL all under the banner of 'HUMANISM-We are all part of Humanity after all'. Gotta go... Fi Amanillah

Saxib, What are some of the objectives that you would like fullfilled by posting this article? An article by a writer that wants to propogate 'Evanglical Confusionism'.

Originally posted by Mr. Jibis: Masha Allah, welcome to the club, Khayr!! Here's a little tip.....If the baby wakes you up in the night from crying, DON'T MOVE!!!!! If you move a muscle, then the wife will know you're awake and will ask you to take care of the baby. Wait until the wife gets up, and then when she's out of the room, you can laugh and go back to sleep. Grrrreat advice! There is only one problem btwn her and I-am the light sleeper. Alhamdulilah. So does this mean you'll be gentler on women (and women issues) going forward? Castro, Inshallah, i'll be a little gentler - at times, when needed! Fatherhood, although alot of work, is definitely a great experience. Fathers do deserve more respect. SubhanAllah, the patience it takes to maintain a family is tremendous. For those that talk down or speak ill of fathers or 'their' father; hold off on your criticism. Remember that they use to wash your diapers and stay up all night for you.

Jicma Lee, EDIT: Here's the dua. " بارك الله لك ÙÙŠ الموهوب لك ،وشكرت الواهب، وبلغ أشدهÙØŒ ورزقت بره٠" .ويرد٠عليه المهنأ Ùيقول : " بارك الله لك وبارك عليك ØŒ وجزاك الله خيراً ØŒ ورزقك الله مثله، وأجزل ثوابك " MashaAllah, what a beautiful dua walaal. JazaAllahu khayrun ilayka. Yes, I'm a new father (alhamdulillah) and I've got something in common with Castro now (Hint!) FF/Scarlet, Wish you lots of poop changing, sloopy kisses, and wailings keeping u awake at night like a proper daddy should be! Thanks for the 'reality checks' lol because I have been experiencing all those things. Children can pack a 'K.O. punch' in there cries...its a strange thing. Sleepless days and nights is definitely in fashion for me, whether I like it or not....lol. Pi/Zero, What can I say saxib, I've been blessed alot sooner then I 'realisticly' thought and Alhamdulillah for that.

Salamad, Can you guess who the latest SOL member to be inducted into the fatherhood club is?

How did a post about contemporary muslim Ulema/Scholars gathering together turn into 'Africans first but last to arabs' post. Walahi waa caajib how the shayateen work with fical and gullible minds! :rolleyes: Naden, whats with the fascination of making the world a Utopia - as you deem fit. :confused: People's values vastly differ so why can't you accept that 'Humanism' is not at the top of the chain for some people.

So the questions to fellow nomads is when (Inshallah) we have a stable government should we encourage and nationalise intellectual foreigners, can you see a Chinese Somali Prime minister in the next hundred years. Or has the 17th century nationalism killed of such possibility ever taking place again Wouldn't that be a shift in 'Somali' values? i.e knowing one's forefathers, establishing close extended family ties etc. In anycase, what would be the objectives in trying to move in that direction: a 'Mutli-Racial' somalia?