N.O.R.F;749777 wrote: Let me explain. For me, secular societies mean Europe and North America (is Mexico secular? ). Popular western culture is dominated by the US. Personally, I grew up in the UK and so base my opinions of secular societies on those two nations (rightly or wrongly). In addition, I was born in the Middle East and live there today. Purely from observations, I have deduced the following: 1. The level of crime is much higher in western secular societies than in ME countries with a form of Shariah Law (why is that?). 2. Family values have been eroded in western secular societies but remain firm among ME societies (why is that?) I’m keeping it to two points as I believe these will be very important to any future Somali state. What I’m trying to do here is get you to be more specific. Considering the above (which you’re free to contest), what is the attraction of a secular state? Specificity cannot be implied when you just take into account the UK and the UAE, and then expand those two countries into entire regions, considering there are 191(?) countries. Let me counter with my own observations, that the level of crime in "western secular societies" varies because crime is virtually nonexistent in many towns and cities in countries like Portugal, New Zealand, Germany, Spain, Austria, Sweden, Norway and Finland. However, when you talk about large population centers like London, Paris, Berlin or Barcelona, then that's a different matter, because where you have people living on top of one another, and particularly in areas where many are poor and marginalized (think the Bronx), then you will have crime and criminals, whether you are in Dubai or Barcelona. As for family values being eroded in "secular western societies", that's purely a fallacy, or rather an opinion and not a matter of fact. I have met and lived with European families where the bond of family and the level of respect for the parents is not unlike that of my own family. Similarly, in every setting, whether it be "secular western countries" or otherwise, you will have variations in family values. For example, in this country, family values are stronger in, say Texas, than California, but then again who am I to say that, and how many families have I sampled? None. It's purely a generalization because of the fact that Texas is more conservative than California. I used to travel a lot in my last job, and I realized things I had not know before and things I had assumed about "the other societies". For example, that strong family values are not restricted to just one set of people (contrary to popular belief in this forum) and that there are a multitude of humans from all walks of the cultural and religious spectra who have strong family values. A bit of traveling around and completely immersing oneself in other cultures usually does the trick of eroding one's ethnocentrism

I saw the demonstrations at the Brooklyn Bridge over the weekend. What a sight! It's about time people in this country stopped being passive about what's happening to the country and demand their rights en masse.

Sayid*Somal;749714 wrote: secular (read in af-soomaali) ! and let me what you think of it - and for those of you advocating for secular somalia - what is secular in Af soomaali? cilmaaniyad

LayZie G.;749646 wrote: Speaking of the Somalis in Shelbyville, what is up with the dusky looking man? Talk about spending all of his time and money at DESSERTSTORE.COM LOL! That's exactly what I was thinking.

N.O.R.F;749423 wrote: But its not that simple is it? In both systems, people are free to live as they wish within the laws of the land. You can't kill. Murder is punishable in both systems. One adopts the death sentence (if the victim’s family so wishes) and the other doesn't (and they walk free soon afterwards) for example. Secular societies today are in free fall with no morals/values left. Kids are disrespectful, governments unilaterally go to war, high crime etc etc. So what is so good about secularism that the country with the highest percentage of Muslims in the world should adopt it as it's legislative structure? Norf, please don't generalize. When you say that "Secular societies today are in free fall with no morals/values left. Kids are disrespectful, governments unilaterally go to war, high crime etc etc." it not only is uninformed, but bordering on ignorance. No offense, walaal. The only bit I agree with in that blanketed sentence is the "governments unilaterally go to war", but there are still many exceptions because secular societies are not confined to the US and certain Western European countries. As to the death penalty, I'm not getting into that because that's a whole different can of worms N.O.R.F;749423 wrote: So what is so good about secularism that the country with the highest percentage of Muslims in the world should adopt it as it's legislative structure? That is what we are debating about, and apparently there are arguments for both sides. I believe Muslims can live in a secular system as well as they can in a Shari'ah system, but the opposite is not true.

Sultan Dheere;749537 wrote: I'll give you an example., Things like stoning, lashings, chopping of hands, public executions etc. make me uncomfortable. I sort of try to rationalise it in my mind that this is not something I can agree with. But I feel I am going against the will of God. I dont know. I believe everyone deserves "due process of law" and without public humiliation. Maybe this is the result of 20 odd years of utter liberal propaganda that have been hammered into me since childhood. Other things I have questioned in Islam is things like inheritance jurisprudence and the distribution of wealth, how assets should be divided up between sons & daughters. I find myself disagreeing with it. I can name other things. Many Muslims (including myself) also strongly disagree with the above things that you have mentioned, so what is one to do? Call it quits? I don't think so. Change must come within the community. If everyone who thinks like you just packs up their spiritual bags and leaves the religion because they don't agree with the way some of their co-religionists apply certain laws, then tell me who will be left? Think about that for a second.

N.O.R.F;749559 wrote: But do they work? Crime in western countries compared to crime in Muslim countries (even with little data from the latter) suggests it does. Norf, there you go again throwing around baseless factoids. A criminal who is intent on committing a crime will do so because the hope that s/he will get away with it will always overcome the fear of of getting caught. And when you say "Western countries", which ones do you mean? Please be specific because there are many "Western countries" out there and not all are the same. The prevalence of crime in NYC is not the same as in Calgary, Santiago or Budapest. Similarly when you say "Muslim countries", could you be more specific because I am sure that the prevalence of crime in Karachi is not the same as in Doha.

The bottom line here is that people must not be forced into anything, this is not the way to run a country, let alone one in tatters like ours. If there is a way to make a federal union with broad autonomy (their own parliaments, laws, etc) to potential secessionist regions like Canada does with Quebec, Spain with Catalunya, Britain with Scotland, or Germany with Bavaria, then that would be an approach I am all for. However, if there is no hope whatsoever in producing a union, to the point that secessionists might take up arms, then why risk bloodshed? The second you hate enough to contemplate forcibly keeping people in an unwanted union, is when you begin to compromise your love for your country.

An excellent production. It's tough being an immigrant in a foreign land, but these strong women have demonstrated that integration is possible through education and communication, and they've made lifelong friendships along the way.

Nabad_dadaye;749399 wrote: shareecada islaamka ayaa xifdisay xuriyada qofka ee nolosha iyo wada noolaanshaha Nabad_dadaye;749399 wrote: wax kastoo sharafka qofka naftiisa , caafimaadkiisa ,maalkiisa wax udhimaya walo isagaba ha ahaatee diinta wey diiday xukuna adag ayeyna kasoo saartay . wax kastoo maslaxada qofka ku jirto diinta ayaa kuu sheegtay . These two statements are contradictory. How is it that Shari'ah preserves one's freedom while at the same time telling people how to live their lives? Mushkiladda shareecada waa taas.

N.O.R.F;749329 wrote: ^Is it only secularism that allows people to 'live and let live'? Its one thing advocating for secularism (anyone can advocate for anything) but its quite another explaining why it would be better than a form of Sharia. The age old European renaissance argument doesn't quite fit. That's a good point, and to answer your question, yes! It is only secular societies that allow people to "live and let live". They allow people to do what they want in their lives without fear of punishment. If there is a Shari'ah system in existence today that allows the individual to be free to express and live as they wish, then I would be happy to be proven wrong.

*Blessed;748794 wrote: I know what you mean about Somalis, most tend to push people farther away from the deen rather than help them understand. Over the years, there have been a few things that I couldn't get my head around, but I dug and dug and asked, asked and asked and Alhamdulilah Allah has opened many doors for me. Islam is not a religion which seeks blind followers, Allah implores us to seek, find and question and to also reflect and believe with certainty. Make a note of the aspects of Islam which confuse you and research on them, read and ask people of knowledge, even scholars are easy to contact these days. I would suggest that you start with the notion of tawheed, Islamic monotheism - Bilal Phillips The Fundamentals of Islamic Monotheism. Chocolate and Honey;748852 wrote: It is ok to question as long as you are seeking. It happens to a lot of us, doubting I mean. It seems to me that you are sort of ignorant about the reasons for the rituals and without a solid reason and belief, the rituals such as prayers and charity are meaningless. I would reccomend you to talk to your local Imam, preferably not Somali. State your concerns and conflicts with the religion and listen to what he says with an open mind. Read, research and research some more. This is the true religion, the real raw deal. Sultan, those are the best two pieces of advice you can get in this forum regarding this matter. Faith is like love, you can be sent to all the dugsis and your parents can tell you to pray all they want, but if your heart is not in the right place then all that is futile. Let me share with you one of my favorite verses from the Qur'an, hopefully it will somewhat clear the matter for you: Al Baqarah (2:286) Translation: "God does not charge a soul except [with that within] its capacity. It will have [the consequence of] what [good] it has gained, and it will bear [the consequence of] what [evil] it has earned. "Our Lord, do not impose blame upon us if we have forgotten or erred. Our Lord, and lay not upon us a burden like that which You laid upon those before us. Our Lord, and burden us not with that which we have no ability to bear. And pardon us; and forgive us; and have mercy upon us. You are our protector, so help us against those who stand against faith."

SomaliNationalist;749273 wrote: why do you not use all the nations who have achieved ,wealth,prosperity, power, unity, because of their ethnic nationalism as Role Models nations like Japan and China instead of unrealistic multiethnic countries like Singapore and Malaysia? How are Malaysia, Singapore, Austria, and Germany unrealistic? Like I said earlier, if there is a way to convince Somalilanders to join a Somali Federation, then I am all for it, I would actually prefer that. However, I am not one to forcibly keep people in a union they don't want.

Chocolate and Honey;749005 wrote: Ughh! These people make me want to barf! Ditto. The King probably feels that he's near the end (he is 87), and that he must do some good works before he has to explain himself to The Creator. Granting roughly half the population one of their rights seems like a good start

ailamos;747951 wrote: Care to elaborate? Is that a fact (substantiated) or an opinion (unsubstantiated)? :confused: The above question still remains unanswered.

SomaliNationalist;749244 wrote: Singapore was a majority chinese nation while Malaysia was majority Malay, those two groups don't share anything and are historical enemies I see what you're saying but, you're missing the big picture, Malaysia has the same ethnic composition as Singapore i.e. Chinese, Malay, and Indians. If they are "historical enemies", then how have they built two stable countries and are economic success stories? There are countries with the same linguistic and cultural base that are separate political entities, a classic example being Germany and Austria. There are also Arab countries, namely in the Persian/Arabian Gulf, who share linguistic, tribal and a cultural heritage but are different political entities. The fact of the matter is that reconciliation cannot be made by force.

Xaaji Xunjuf;749228 wrote: Congratulations to the graduates! They are the future.

SomaliNationalist;749238 wrote: We will never give our nothern regions indepedence, you will always be a part of Somalia like it or not. The world is not going to give a poor and backward region lead by drunken tribalists regonization. Here we go. Although I would like to see a unified Somali nation, it's not necessarily a bad thing if there are two political Somali entities. I once had a Malaysian professor who told us about the story of how Singapore separated from Malaysia. It's a situation not unlike Somaliland/Somalia where Singapore became independent first, then joined the Malaysian Federation. But because of certain differences in ideology between the leaders (as well as some Chinese/Malay conflicts), Singapore separated from the Federation. Now, Malaysia being the larger and more powerful of the two, could have insisted on a unified peninsula, after all both Malaysia and Singapore have intertwined history and culture, but on the contrary, Malaysia voted unanimously to expel Singapore from the Federation in order to avoid bloodshed and animosity. According to my professor, the moral of the story was that neighboring nations mutually benefit one another, so if your neighbor prospers, then you will prosper as well (Read further: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/09/news/09iht-edbowring.html). Now, since the reality on the ground, presently at least, is that Somalilanders wants to remain independent, then we should work towards that because peace and stability in Somaliland can help stabilize the rest of Somalia. Besides, the idea of Dual Citizenship is genius. It has worked in case of Northern Ireland, where people there can have both British and Irish citizenship, if they choose to. Having free movement of people between Somalia and Somaliland will enhance commercial activity. So, all this this adamant nationalism makes no sense to me. If there is a potential of more economic benefit to have two political entities and there is dual citizenship, then why insist on one political entity and the prospect of more infighting between the north and the south?

Somalina;742995 wrote: Wonderful! Paving the way to a prosperous future through education.

Ina lilah wa ina ilayhi raji3oon. I hope he gets what he deserves, whether it's jannah or jahannam.

stuff and nonsense...

Good stuff, I saw him run in the NYC half marathon earlier this year, made me proud I wish him all the best.

They sure took their time, but it's a positive step nonetheless.

Xaaji Xunjuf;737669 wrote: Secularism= Kafirnimo Care to elaborate? Is that a fact (substantiated) or an opinion (unsubstantiated)? :confused:

Faarax-Brawn;746565 wrote: Abti, find one more positive links related to those two words. You wont see it. if u do,it is buried deep into 14th page with italics. Faarax-Brawn's common sense trumps Nuune's paranoia Let me break it down to you, yaa Nuune, the point was to find quotes from the same source... quickly. I have no patience for sifting through articles and spit-shining news for you so that your feelings don't get hurt