Afghan on trial for Christianity

[codetalker]

^

 

Yo, you need to separate Sharia Law (as ordained upon mankind by Almighty Allah SWT) and the Sharia Law being practiced in a country under the military occupation of non-Muslims! I'm putting the legality of Sharia Law in Afghanistan into question because, at the end of the day, they don't even run their own country. Law is executed by those in control. Afghanis are most certainly not in control of their country and you know it.

 

Secondly, quit trying to personalize the issue. Don't worry about where I live or why I choose to live here. Stick to the topic or save your nacnac for those who give a f*&^ as to what crap you type up next.

[Valenteenah.]

Sharia Law? More like Pick 'n' Mix Law. That's what Codetalker probably means, I guess. You can't take just the penal laws in sharia and throw everything else out, which is what happens in Muslim countries. The question is: is any verdict under Shariah Law lawful in Allah's eyes when the proper structures are not in place and the correct processes have not been followed? It's an interesting question, I think.

 

I wonder if it has been investigated by past scholars?

 

 

[Edit] LoL, Codetalker, you beat me to it.

 

 

you need to separate

Sharia Law (as ordained upon mankind by Almighty Allah SWT)

and the Sharia Law being practiced in a country under the military occupation of non-Muslims!

Just a clarification, Sharia Law has been drawn up from the Qur'an, the sunnah of the Prophet (Hadiths) and the consensus of learned scholars on issues not covered in either the Qur'an or the hadiths. The Shariah is not Divine Law. It has probably been modified by scholars as well as ruling dynasties through the centuries. Only the Qur'an is divine. The distinction is often overlooked.

[codetalker]

Originally posted by Ahura:

The question is: is any verdict under Shariah Law lawful in Allah's eyes when the proper structures are not in place and the correct processes have not been followed?

Thank you!

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by codetalker:

^Yo, you need to separate Sharia Law (as ordained upon mankind by Almighty Allah SWT) and the Sharia Law being practiced in a country under the military occupation of non-Muslims!

 

That's just dumb suggestion. Its like saying Karl Marx & Engel's Communist manifesto should be judeged separate from what communists did in its name. Sharia Law is what is practiced. We can NEVER trully judge anything if not by what it engenders when practiced by HUMANS. The Sharia Law you talk about, the one that is divorced from the actions of muslims who practice it, is pure fantasy. It doesn't exist. And your legality arguement is pure quibble.

 

 

Don't worry about where I live or why I choose to live here.

 

Where you choose to live matters in this particular case because by living in the West you ARE saying something is WRONG with Sharia Law. It shows contradiction as well a gaping gulf between what you say and what you do. Hence, completely partinent.

 

 

Stick to the topic or save your

nacnac

for those who give a f*&^ as to what crap you type up next.

Like a true coward, cut and run.

[Castro]

^ Easy with the name calling there. This could be interesting if it's not personalized. Right?

[Valenteenah.]

Where you choose to live matters in this particular case because by living in the West you ARE saying something is WRONG with Sharia Law.

Not really. It may only point to the malpractice of Sharia Law in Muslim countries, rather than the practice of it. If that makes sense. But it hardly matters. What percentage of Muslims actually reside in Non-Muslim countries? (not counting Western Muslims - converts etc). Not enough to matter.

 

So what does that say? Majority of Muslims live in their own countries (country of origin), whether it is ruled by Shariah Law or not. If your statement is accurate, this would imply that most Muslims are/would-be happy to live under Shariah Law. No?

[makalajabti]

I am happy to see that not all of you are pro-sharia, I was losing hope :cool:

[bilan]

how can any sane muslim be against the shari'a,shari'a is derived from hadiths and quran,scholars disagreed with each other,but these people actually did spend years and years learning hadiths and fiqhs,and i mean years not two minutes googling. also when they disagreed with each other they had their proof based again on hadiths and quran,they were/are not following their desires. i think shari'a is complex field,and unless you have the knowledge you can not argue against it.

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by Ahura:

Not really. It may only point to the

malpractice

of Sharia Law in Muslim countries, rather than the practice of it. If that makes sense.

 

 

It doesn't make any sense and I tell you why? The only Sharia Law is the one practiced by Afghanistan, S. Arabia among others. Conversely, the REAL Sharia Law the one you and others exalt so much... the perfect one, benchmark for judging how Sharia should be practiced is pure fantasy. Name me ONE country where Sharia Law is being practiced as really intended in your view? If you can't, then it doesn't exist. And Sharia Law is what is practiced by several countries around the world.

[Viking]

Socod_badne and makalajabti,

Are you against Sharia Law? Can one call him-/herself a Muslim and still support secular law over Sharia Law? If you say so, can you show how Islam supports this?

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by Viking:

Socod_badne and makalajabti,

Are you against Sharia Law?

Yes I'm against Sharia Law.

 

 

Can one call him-/herself a Muslim and still support secular law over Sharia Law?

 

If most muslims call themselves muslims while simultaneously rejecting sharia law (that includes YOU as well), then I don't see why not.

 

 

If you say so, can you show how Islam supports this?

No because there's no dependence between being a muslim and Sharia Law. The link is purely fictitious, plucked from thin air. One can't provide 'evidence' to support a conceptual mirage.

[Viking]

Socod_badne,

Originally posted by Socod_badne:

If most muslims call themselves muslims while simultaneously rejecting sharia law (that includes

YOU

as well), then I don't see why not.

First of all, how am I rejecting Shari'a Law? Secondly, given the right to vote democratically, almost all countries with a large Muslim population will vote for a theocracy. We've seen this in among others Iran, Turkey and Algeria. The system in Iran (the elections were foiled with coups in Turkey and Algeria) might not be perfect or the way we all want it to be, but there is no perfect system anywhere in the world. A good system is one that constantly seeks to improve.

 

People who lived before Nabi Musa (AS) had no Divine Laws to adhere to, but the generations that came after Muhammad PBUH have to follow Divine Laws the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Now I remember that you reject all Sunnah and only follow the Qur'an; this is peculiar because you follow the Book revealed to the Prophet but not what the Prophet told his followers (us). This puts you in a rather awkward position, but I suppose you find an equally peculiar way to justify this.

 

 

Originally posted by Socod_badne:

No because there's no dependence between being a muslim and Sharia Law. The link is purely fictitious, plucked from thin air. One can't provide 'evidence' to support a conceptual mirage.

Are you saying that the Divine Laws in the Qur'an are there just for our amusement? What use are the Laws in the Qur'an governing alcohol, marriage, divorce, adultery, treason, inherictance, taxes (both Zakat and Jizya), trade etc...what are they there for? What do you think Law should be based upon? Our whims, what we deem permissible or fobidden?

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by Viking:

First of all, how am I rejecting Shari'a Law?

 

By choosing to live in the West over Sharia Law run countries.

 

 

Secondly, given the right to vote democratically, almost all countries with a large Muslim population will vote for a theocracy.

 

 

Who cares what they'd vote for? Democracies, almost all of them, weren't voted in but violently or coercively imposed, often accompanied by revolutions, social upheavels, civil wars, conquests etc. What's stopping muslims from rising up and overthrowing their current governments? Nothing. The only logical reading of that is establishing Sharia Law is not a priority.

 

 

Are you saying that the Divine Laws in the Qur'an are there just for our amusement?

 

 

No but then that is not what I was commenting on, was it? You asked me to show what DOESN'T exist -- irrevocable dependence between Sharia Law and being a muslim. In fact Islam be it the Quran or even the Sunnah says nothing about Sharia Law militating faith. To be a muslim you have to believe Allah and profess the Shahada. So you asked me to provide evidence/show what doesn't exist, I can't.

 

 

What do you think Law should be based upon? Our whims, what we deem permissible or fobidden?

FYI, laws are NEVER based on our whims. Even for nonbelievers. Rather they're imposed on us by our environment and mitigating circumstances.

[Gabbal]

You asked me to show what DOESN'T exist -- irrevocable dependence between Sharia Law and being a muslim. In fact Islam be it the Quran or even the Sunnah says nothing about Sharia Law militating faith. To be a muslim you have to believe Allah and profess the Shahada.

Are you retarded (not insulting here, merely using the medical condition of mental retardation)? There is so much inconsistency in that statement, it's amazing people have the stomach to respond and keep up a debate with you. No matter what your colleagues, Makalajabti, JB, and Castro, say or do to legitimaze your nac-nac, you will never be taken seriously.

 

You say that a Muslim has to believe in Allah (SWT). Is Shariah Law not the Law of Allah as recieved from his being in the Qur'an? Is the Qur'an, as believed by all Muslims, not the words and sayings of Allah (SWT)? Isn't, therefore, a direct link between being a Muslim and Shariah Law? Since, you asserted, that to be a Muslim you have to believe in Allah, isn't one aspect of believing in Allah believing his words and verdicts?

[Socod_badne]

Originally posted by HornAfrique:

Are you retarded (not insulting here, merely using the medical condition of mental retardation)?

 

I don't know but I've been told my IQ is in the low 20s. What's yours?

 

 

There is so much inconsistency in that statement, it's amazing people have the stomach to respond and keep up a debate with you. No matter what your colleagues, Makalajabti, JB, and Castro, say or do to legitimaze your nac-nac, you will never be taken seriously.

 

There is no discrepancy in what I've said because if it was you would've leapt on it and tore it apart like pitbull. Instead you grouch appearing like enraged bull charging through China shop. Pity you!

 

 

Is Shariah Law not the Law of Allah as recieved from his being in the Qur'an?

 

 

No. There is nothing Godly about beheading disbelievers (or others for that matter) or lapidation. Maybe you think there is, good for you. I disagree. One question for you: why do you subordinate Allah's laws embodied in Sharia Law as you claim to Western laws by LIVING under them? And what was you said about 'inconsistancies?' I can hear ya, speak up!

 

 

Since, you asserted, that to be a Muslim you have to believe in Allah, isn't one aspect of believing in Allah believing his words and verdicts?

I'll help you just this one time although I suspect it'll go over your head. I assert the Sharia Law is not divinely ordained. To "prove" that I just have to cite just ONE Sharia punishment that is contradicted by what Allah ordained in Quran. There are several but the most notable is the punishment of adultery. Sharia law proscribes stoning to death. While Allah delineated in the Quran only 100 lashes. Since in Islam the Quran trumps everything else, we can conclude that the Sharia is not Allah's laws. PERIOD. END OF DISCUSSION!