Originally posted by cynical lady: GJ- I make a point not to respond to people who frame their responses around religion. I think you're my new hero

A real shocker http://www.tikkun.org/tikkundaily/2009/12/04/member-of-the-swiss-political-party-that-pushed-for-min aret-ban-converts-to-islam/ For German speakers here is the original version: http://www.20min.ch/news/dossier/minarett/story/27286120

http://www.somalicruises.com/

I was focusing on Sayid's tip "on serious note - is this an error in spelling or deliberate mutation of Somali word for Bank." I guess attention to detail doesn't reign on this thread

^ Word!

Originally posted by peasant: quote:Originally posted by ailamos: I think the Arabic is fine... Alf Shilin(an) Somali(yan)... the () represent the tashdeed... Ailamos Somalia and Somaliland are not written the same in arabic.. check your arabic spelling ah! you mean the SL 1000 note, I see it, they misspelled it as Somalia

Two questions that sparked my curiosity about the SL 1000 note: Is the girl on the 1000 SL note a Somali? Are there any wild lions left in SL?

I think the Arabic is fine... Alf Shilin(an) Somali(yan)... the () represent the tashdeed...

Bankiga/Baanka Somalia/Somaliland? What's the point?

Thanks NG, that interview was great!!

Hope he rises within the ranks.

GP, perhaps I misread his post, if what you're saying is true then I stand corrected.

Originally posted by Khayr: and Bush and the Internet.... Ailmos, do you believe in the devil? and if yes or no or i don't know - why? Definitely Bush, but not so much the Internet I'm just an observer, what I believe need not matter.

Not sure if this has been posted before: http://tinyurl.com/y8tp8dt If that doesn't work, try this: History of the Devil A quick summary: Lucifer, Beelzebub, The Beast, Satan, Shaitan... He has been called many names and taken many strange different forms over the ages. So where does the concept of the traditional evil come from? The History of the Devil goes back to the ancient Middle East, even before the Old Testament to find the roots of Satan. The answer is in the ancient Mesopotamia. In Zoroastrianism it was believed that the all-knowing good God was Ahura Mazda, the one Uncreated Creator, and Ahriman was his antithesis, the God of chaos, the dark and evil one. Probably the bases of these teachings like heaven and hell, good and evil were transferred to the other monotheistic religions. Broadcasted in 2007. Grab your popcorn, it's an hour long. If you're interested, also check out "The History of the Devil and the Idea of Evil from the Earliest Times to the Present Day" by Paul Carus (1900) http://www.sacred-texts.com/evil/hod/index.htm

^ Thanks for the tip Blessed. I just looked up the Tunisian system and noticed the following important points: Personal Status: Upon promulgation, on August 13, 1956, the Personal Status Code redeemed the place of the Tunisian women in the family and in society through: * The Tunisian Republic guarantee the inviolability of the human person and the freedom of conscience, and protects the free exercise of beliefs * abolition of polygamy * institution of the judicial divorce * institution of equality between men and women in the use of the right to divorce * granting the mother the right to guardianship of her children under age on death of the husband * inheritance laws follow Shari'a law, which grants a larger share of inheritance to sons than to daughters In 1993 the Personal Status Code underwent several substantive amendments: * abolition of the wife's duty of submission to the husband by substituting the duty of mutual respect; * co-responsibility in managing the affairs of the couple and the family; * reinforcement of the mother's prerogatives in the area of decision-making and guardianship; * granting guardianship to the mother in the event of default by the father; * granting majority to the wife under age (age 17 to 20) regarding civil and commercial acts. Two laws promulgated in 1998 granted women: * the right to give her name to her child born of unknown filiation; * the right to choose the system of joint ownership upon marriage. It'll be a matter of time until the Sharia-based inheritance system is scrapped altogether as well: http://tinyurl.com/yde9bna. According to one study "Given women's advancements in the labor field and state efforts to enhance women's economic participation, such a (unjust) policy seems anachronistic. As a fairly large proportion of Tunisian women draw on personal savings to start a business, the reform of inheritance laws could help to spur women's entrepreneurship."

If there's a particular group of people I loathe it's those missionaries that are present in every natural disaster to take advantage of the desperate, brainwash people and steal children for adoption in religious households.

I never thought I would say this but I completely agree with Eng.Cadde here.

Originally posted by Raamsade: There is no way this sort of arrangement will work in the Muslim world. Don't conflate post-enlightenment Europe with the contemporary Islamic world. The Enlightenment has convinced Europeans that dogma was NOT a virtue. And from that paradigm shift was born liberal democracy. The situation of Muslims in Britain has shown that there is a preference of Sharia Law, even when civil law is the law of the land, Muslims are going to their local sheikh's to seek judgement over certain cases. Although I disagree with Sharia being the law of the country, imposing a secular system on a people that refuse to be governed by it is not a solution. And when I say a dual system I mean only the judicial system, and not law enforcement. I think people should be given a choice and that any dual Sharia system should be open to scrutiny and not behind closed doors. People should be well informed of their rights, they should be told what civil law says and what Islamic law says about particular cases, sort of a legal consultation. The more they are educated and see that Islamic law is not fair in certain situations (e.g. inheritance) the more they are likely to adopt civil law.

Yeah, it seems this thread has died... But I think the consensus is that some Muslims want to be governed by Sharia while other Muslims (and people from other religions) would prefer a secular system. So, an adequate system, in my opinion, would be one that is dualistic whereby the country is governed by a secular law but if a Muslim(s) wants to settle an issue (e.g. inheritance, dispute, etc.) through Sharia, then that would be made available. This way everyone is treated equally and it gives choice to the people. Similar to the system in Britain where the decisions of the courts of the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal are enforced through the British judicial system. See here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article4749183.ece But the question is, what if two Muslims are locked in dispute and one of them wants to settle it through Sharia and another wants to settle it through the secular system. Then what happens?

I think another 1000 posts of self-opinionated bile are in order. Please do stay.

This must've been circulated before, impressive nonetheless: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zktMJo7DpI (Wait until the second guy comes to the podium)

Peacenow raises an issue Maximus disagrees, makes an objection Peacenow reflects, apologizes Maximus accepts apology The floor is open for a reasonable discussion A good example of a mature conversation. Too bad there aren't many of them in this forum, everyone is ready to point fingers and start accusations the second they hear something they don't like.

Interesting... Thanks for sharing this piece.

Originally posted by Cicero: quote: Originally posted by Naxar Nugaaleed: You guys remind me of the witch hunters in monty python sketch. A mob demanding, in this case, a member should be banned for his views: He has insulted our culture, our woman and now our children, lol. Come down people, no harm is done, if don't like someone's view of things, move along. The remarks of Peacenow were arguably in poor taste. You can ignore him as Paragon does, or teach yourself how to control your emotions; it works for NGONGE. He's probably livid with peacenow's crusade against arabs, but tolerates it just the same. No histrionics. Finally, a couple of different viewpoints. Well said you two. I don't agree with what Peacenow said in this instance but at the same time I hope he is not banned just because some have an ultra-nationalist chip on their shoulder. Those kids certainly deserve applause, not criticism.

^ looooooool