Originally posted by Tuujiye: ^^^ wale waxaa kaa raaye Norfe lool no wonder he was just writing to you one liner lool.. looool... seems like you havent been following the thread, Norf is being ignored until he answers th question (see above) Period. I have nothing against you sxb, is just when you attack Islam and bring your Fox news views... you havent been following my posts. Awoowe the prescription on your eyeglasses has expired... get a new one and follow the conversation... you're Fox news turned Muslim, so please spare me your bigotry... is ok to be a gaal saaxiib just respect other diins and if you have hard time understanding it, go read and do your own research..stop listning to gaalada... Certainly there is nothing wrong in being a gaal... but your idea of "respect other diins" is the conformation to your thoughts and convictions... I'm done here.... Good riddance

never thought you guys would side with Dawkins and his outlandish suggestions... by the way, Ratzinger was a Nazi? or are you saying that just because he's German? It's a silly idea from a silly man. Period.

^^ loooooooooooool

^^^ doesnt matter ... and you're welcome

Originally posted by LayZie G.: ^lol, now test him and see if he can pick Christopher Hitchens from a line up? PS: Khayr, you are silly, old boy. Is that him, Christopher Hitchens?? No? Aww shucks it's PETER Hitchens...

^^ looooooool ... I guess Khayr isnt a fan of theoretical physics either.. hahaha

Dawkins needs to put a sock in it... attention seekers are the ones to yell the loudest...

Copying from the British parliament, I wouldn't mind having this in a future Somali parliament hahaha The number of sheikhs is currently fixed at 26 and, in an Upper House of 742 members, the Lords Spiritual now constitute 3.5% of its membership. What do the sheikhs do in Parliament? There is always a Lord Spiritual in the House of Lords when it is sitting. The reading of prayers in the House is determined on a weekly rota basis and Lords Spiritual will also attend the House for debates and votes when matters of interest and concern are before it. When sheikh's retire (compulsory at 70), their membership of the House also ceases. Some have then become life peers and it is traditional for ulama to become so. Who do they represent in Parliament? There is no ‘Sheikh's Party’ and as non-aligned members, their activities in the Upper House are not subject to a whip. Like all other members of the Lords, they do not represent a constituency. They sit as individual Lords Spiritual, and as such they have much in common with the Crossbenchers and independent peers, who are not party-affiliated. Their presence in the Lords is an extension of their general vocation as sheikhs to preach God's word and to lead people in prayer. The sheikh's provide an important independent voice and spiritual insight to the work of the Upper House and are a voice for all people of faith, not just Muslims.

Originally posted by Blessed.*: *sigh* Must resist slapping B... must resist! that just cracked me up!!!!

Originally posted by *Ibtisam: P.s. Aliamos reminds me of Castro when he first joined. It is the strangers thing. :eek: hahahahahaha (just imagined myself in the early Castro beard) But, I have no intention of ruling anyone, I just want my country to be a place people flock into rather than flock out of

Good piece of writing Blessed, quite the opposite from Tuujiye and the rest, including myself, have posted Originally posted by Blessed.*: First of all Britain does not keep religion out of public life and education. The Church of England has a say on political and legal matters and the government is constantly poking it's nose in peoples religious believes and practice.. It is true that a certain number of the archbishops of the Church of England are allowed to sit in the upper house of the British Parliament and they number less than 4% of the total parliament and they normally do not vote and have little political influence. As I said in your other post Aliamos, you'd do well to compare nations that are similar in culture. Sadaams secular state was no different to King Fahads theocratic monarchy, both were tribal, intolerant and dictatorial but err. actually Fahad killed less. Tunisa and UAE are also similar in the way they engage with their people, both states are dictatorships though one pays lip service to democratic ideals. However, on a postitive note both states are developing and making positive progress in economic / social development. As for the comparison of the countries that are culturally similar, you bring about valid similarities between Saudi and Iraq under repressive systems of governance. And as I'm sure you've read, and hopefully understood, in my earlier posts, that I don't side with either and I am not for repression of any kind Islamic or otherwise. The confusion here is that when I mention secularism, people jump the gun and assume I'm talking about secularization as both do not offer the same conclusion to the subject of religion in society. Further more, he fails and so many who push secular laws also fail to actually discuss the pros and cons of Secular ideals and Islamic ideals theoratically. It's always America is good and Saudi is bad- so lets ditch Islamc law!! There certainly are pros and cons of both systems, no system is perfect... However, in my opinion, a society based on the entire reasoning that certain things must be made illegal because God ordained it without leaving the choice to the individual (after all it is they who are going to hell) is not somewhere I personally would live in. I am for the opinion to leave the judging to God and leave religiosity (or the lack of) to the individual. Period. I do not like the forcing of people into something they do not want, whether its Sharia or otherwise. If the greater Somali populace votes for a form of Sharia, then nothing I can say or do would matter because the people want it... However from what I can tell from these forums is that there is a mixed opinion and there is no definite consensus on the matter. Finally, the migrants that 'flood into western secular' countries are from all sorts of countries, many of which are corrupt / dictatorial secular states. Many are also from corrupt dictatorial religious states as well... I don'' know why you brought that into this debate as very few are from countries which apply sharia law- I've never in my life met a Saudi / Irani refugee. You haven't met an Irani asylum seeker? I take it you haven't heard of the Iranian Refugees Alliance based in New York City. There are many Irani refugees in the US and Europe. Ironically, there are many Western economic immigrants in this wealthy, sharia based Muslim country that I live in. Are they driving your taxis, serving you shawarmas and cleaning up after you? As Muslims we believe that the Quran is the true universal message of God. The Quran has both legislative elements and commands that requires one to promote Islamic values to the public at individual and macro levels - how do we reconcile this with secular ideals that oppose these fundamental tenets of the Quran? A very good question, the answer to which I currently do not have and would like to know if someone else does.

yaa JB, shouldn't the title of the post be "How Americans really see Saudis?"? It's true what she says that ignorance goes both ways, it's a well-balanced article, good read...

Originally posted by *Ibtisam: Mida kale, adigu why is it every discussion thread regardless of topic it ends up being a debate about where you are going or you leaving the deen or your bed time habits. Maxad uu entertain garesy these randomness. People who object to you and what you may or may not follow iyo the discussion hala kalo saaro. I think you know I'm a reasonable person I post a rather unoffensive opinion on a matter then get attacked for it and called all manner of things, for that I cannot keep quiet, besides I'm at a conference these days so I have time to battle the self-righteous in this forum

Originally posted by Tuujiye: Learn the faith then ask me a question like this.. If the Canadian law followed the bible, muslims would love to be in Canada.. What do you know about the true Christianity? I know more than you... see below for your outlandish statements Sxb la imoo argument with in the topic ha furin another topic… diinta Christaanka iyo tan Muslimka hadii labadooda sida saxda ah loo wada raaci lahaa, aduunkaan nabad buu ahaan lahaa… looks like you know sida saxda ah of every religion there is yaa Tuujiye, the Catholic Chruch over the last so many hundreds of years has shown the true colors of what happens when they control things... "sida saxda" ah oo aad kahadleysid only presents itself in certain households here and there but it fails miserably when trying to govern the masses... So secularism is the answer? Lool and you make your self sound so proud by distaining your self from Islam by calling it 12th century Andalusia.. Saaxiib you really need to read History of Islam and the History of the west before you make such points.. I'm not disdaining Islam and if you have carefully read when I've been saying instead of being oversensitive... The Islam in Andalusia was the highlight of Muslim rule in the world and if you didn't know that then I'm sorry to say that I have no time to teach you history... Many nations has gone thru what Somalia is going thru today including the USA and look at them today… I look at them and see secular countries where all types of migrants flooding into them... That includes Muslims if you didn't know If Muslims followed the Qur’aan the right way and respected it’s values, we would have peace and have moved forward in this world... If... if... if... if... that's all I keep reading from you... when was the last time these "ifs" have been translated into reality? Islam teaches the way of life in fact that’s the meaning of Islam saaxiib. We do have the history of peace and growth, wealth and health and everything that made a great nation strong. Tuujiye, ya 7abibi awoowe, I am not in disagreement here that Islam teaches so many wonderful things... Muslims and Christian and Jews lived side by side when they all respected and followed their true books.. It is what you call secularism that broke them a part, it is your kind does that don’t believe in God that broke them apart.. If you didn't know Muslim decline was not instigated by secularism, the term itself was created in the 1800s and besides scholars like Fakhry are of the opinion that Ibn Rushd was one of the fathers of secular thought. All 3 faith band alcohol and sex before marriages lool and all three faith respected human rights avoided trouble… Christianity prohibits alcohol? you're kidding right? have you heard of the Communion? Judaism prohibits alcohol? have you heard of havdallah at the end of Shabbat? I realize that your statements are rather empty awoowe... retirement approaches... So saaxiib wax aan aniga ku weydiinayo ma aha about secularism because I know waxa ee secularism u taagan tahay laakiin I asked you a question which you keep avoiding because you know is the truth and you keep on quoting to other as if they would think of me weird lool.. I asked you a legit question and that question is what is your true interest of secular government? Simple! OK, fair enough Tuujiye, I wasn't avoiding your question but since aad adiga ogtahay secularismta waxa ee u taagantay then you should know the answer... In any case, my interest is simple, having lived several Muslim countries and having lived in some secular ones I have realized that I would much rather be living in the latter. I could give you many many secular governments that abuse the rights of all.. And please don’t try to make a case by saying such things like “is not the right secular system” because it won’t make sense. if I did then I would be giving you the same argument you gave me "If Muslims followed the Qur’aan the right way and respected it’s values, we would have peace and have moved forward in this world..." so if I say "it is not the right secular system" and it doesn't make sense then what you said above won't make sense either... they're based on the same logic However saaxiib, by reading this last part of what you wrote is clear why you want secular government and is just that bolded area.. The true Islam protects the minorities and other classes you wrote their laakiin adiga waxa aad secular government u rabtid is because of the guilt you feel personally for leaving your faith! Is simple saaxiib and wiligaa that guilt iyo fear and even confusion ayaad ku noolaneysaa… How do you know that I have left my faith? Which is my faith? Do I have one? You cannot answer any of those questions awoowe with complete certainty, you don't know me so please don't pretend you do. The you-left-your-faith-because-you-advocate-secularism argument is a bit childish so please leave it behind and don't embarrass yourself. Anaga hanala imaan such things like Ayaan xirsi iyo beenteeda, hanoogu soo ganban Secular theory iyo the Idea of protecting the rights of human.. Saaxiib we all want a world were peace is rejoiced laakiin secularism is not the right theory ee iska hanuun oo ilaahey xarigiisa qabso…. ayayyaaay... Ayaan halkee ka imaaday?!?!? waryaa why are you comparing me to that whackjob? Like I said before get over your sensitivity awoowe... You keep on making the same argument and sometimes all I see is you and other gaalo trying to dirt Islam Show me one spot where I dirt Islam. I’m up for rights and peace and I have nothing against people who don’t believe in Islam or god Liar liar pants on fire... I have never openly attacked Islam but you have a problem with me? hmmm... that's a contradiction awoowe... Everytime you come here with you commercial ideas and your Glen Beck views and try to sound so intelligent…. Again comparing me to another conservative quack... seriously awoowe what is up with you... getting a bit worked up I see I'm not someone who is an expert of Islam So please stop acting like one Wareer Badabaa!!! You're worked up... please calm down, you even misspelled your trademark signature

the deceased has an identical twin, he'll be president and it will be as if nothing happened

Originally posted by *Ibtisam: quote: so I ask you awoowe, what is wrong with a secular system of government where the rights of ALL are protected? where Muslims have the right to go to prayer during the work day, where you hear athaan everywhere five times a day and where the minorities fully protected because the law says so and prohibits discrimination based on religion, gender, orientation, ethnicity, age and social class... where the basic fact that we are all human being with the right to a decent life is what binds us and where the government does not favor one group over the other... Where does this happen dear Aliamos?? I would like to move there. That model certainly does not exist in practice anywhere, certain groups are always favored in one way or the other but the resistance to both change and the formulation of a base from which we can at least attempt to reach that ideal is what Tuujiye stands for. My awoowe here subscribes to the ideology of xenophobia and dominance over the "other" which is rooted in his religious convictions and that's exactly what I am against. What I am trying to say is that at least the countries of the West have the protection of the rights of all living within their borders embedded in their constitutions. The practical applications of these are a different matter but certain countries, perhaps Canada or the Scandinavian countries have applied them to great extents. If anyone resident feels violated they have the ability to take the government to court, this is the rule of law in a secular nation. Do you think this would be the case in a system that is dictated by some people's interpretation of divine law? I think not. I am not saying the Western system is perfect by any means whatsoever, all I'm saying is that it should not be rejected solely on the basis that it has been created by gaalo, which is something that utterly repulses my poor awoowe and makes him blind to the benefits that could come with it. when someone makes statements such as "umadiina waxa aad diinta islaamka u nacdeen is your personal lifes... iska soo hanuuna oo ilaahey ka cabsada... you will always be lost and you will always look for an excuse why you left the diin.. I wonder how you all sleep at night knowing what waits for you... is sad when someone knows the truth and they ignore it" it displays the level of ignorance and madax adeeg that is prevalent in puritanical, self righteous people... he goes on to say Secular iyo qurufaadkaan aad sheegeysaan ma aha wax meesha anaga noo yaala.... and it makes me wonder why there is such a direct link in his mind between secularism iyo kurufaad?

no distractions from the truth there amigo... I await thy response

this thread will be rendered useless just as the "Why Arsenal will crush Barca" was... the full force of Barca will send the the Italians crying "mama miaaaaaa!"

the same circular statements are going round and round from Tuujiye to Norfsky and back to Tuujiye. Statements that hold cannot hold their own weight. Norfsky is avoiding the matter and does not have the testicles to tell me what is right with the current Arab model of Islamic governance. Until he does, I shall ignore all his comments... and now on to my dear awoowe Tuujiye nin oo qarniga horee madaxdiisu wili ku jirta oo secularismta madax adeeq ku qaabila iyo qafkasto oo waxaas kahadlo gaal bu uu yahay which is something that I cannot understand when there are millions of Muslims living in a country like Canada, building mosques and going around wearing whatever they think Islam dictates... the government does not interfere in their rights and protects them... and even if some bigots try to change that then they will be met with opposition... something unheard of in a theocracy where the rights of a human are dictated by ambiguous laws that are vulnerable to errors of interpretation... imagine if Canadian laws came from the Bible? What do you think the fate of all those Muslims to be? In any case, awoowe Tuujiye, you talk about dhaqanka soomalida but what you don't understand and probably never will is that this "Dhaqan" you talk about is not a static thing and will most probably change over time... what you think is Somali culture now may not be the same as what your children and children's children will think their culture is... besides, there is no such thing as a unified "Somali culture" where everyone talks and behaves in the same manner, every Somali is different and as you can see from this discussion our viewpoints are not uniform... you do not understand the concept of secular governance, or rather you refuse to understand it because you associate it with the West... so if that is the case awoowe since our "culture" as you put it is rooted in tribalism and clan loyalty, perhaps we should stay in that framework since it's our own system which we invented without interference from the white man... the fact that we, in this forum, have rejected tribalism and the concept of clan loyalty shows that we have rejected a basic tenant of this "dhaqan" you talk about so please spare us your crooked viewpoint because the purity of culture exists nowhere, like I said before "culture" is an evolving entity and not stuck in the time as you would like it to be... we have demonstrated from the rejection of clan loyalty that we are ready to change the things which cause harm and injustice and since the concept of religious governance is the favoritism of one group over the other then that is not a just system... before you say anything and point to 12th century andalusia as an example of religious pluralism let me remind you that we are not in that time and age and that today we are infected with the concept of a religious race between us and the Christian West, a race which, if you haven't noticed, we are losing and depending on the West for assistance and support while at the same time the West is using us as puppets against each other while we clench our Qurans and refuse to take from the West certain concepts which has enabled them to prosper and unclench the fist of religious control that has kept them from advancing... they have achieved that while keeping their religious identity as Christians... so I ask you awoowe, what is wrong with a secular system of government where the rights of ALL are protected? where Muslims have the right to go to prayer during the work day, where you hear athaan everywhere five times a day and where the minorities fully protected because the law says so and prohibits discrimination based on religion, gender, orientation, ethnicity, age and social class... where the basic fact that we are all human being with the right to a decent life is what binds us and where the government does not favor one group over the other... it may not exist anywhere but at least we can strive to accomplish that ideal, and that is something you, awoowe, are resisting. so, tell me what is wrong with that picture? and please don't ignore the question like Norfsky

LOL@"Micheal jackson lugta wee lugta waaw"

Originally posted by Jacaylbaro: I know What is wrong with the Arab model of Islamic state ............ it is full of hypocrisy. Spot on...

Originally posted by Jacaylbaro: quote:Originally posted by Napoleon: Tuujiye You are cawaan lowlife garac with the IQ of cockroach, you do not represent muslims. Waaryaa what is with all that insults ,,,,, just admit you're hopeless and defeated in the argument ,,,,,, silly you Not a fan of insults either yaa Napoleon, that was in bad taste...

Originally posted by Norfsky: ^Come on ailamos. You're the one(s) making such claims. I'm just interested to hear what you have to say. It's not a claim yaa Nor, a quick look at Arab countries right now is testament enough... Now will you indulge me and tell me what is right with the Arab model of an Islamic state? As for Tuujiye... hadda waqti maheeysti so jawaabtaada waan u soo noqondoona ee isugg

^Word! They certainly don't know how good they have it at home...

^^ then Nor, perhaps you can tell me what's right with the Arab model of an Islamic state?