As you know things have been going for muslims for last decade.All the discrimination and hatred they have been facing. Led to the rise of the term Islamophobia. What r ur thoughts on it.
I have to admit you never hear the good stuff about what Muslims do in America. That said I think it is more important to focus on the bad so that Islam corrects itself in those areas. If we just talked about all the good stuff then nobody would care about the woman who got stoned to death.
And how many women are subjected to that? If we focus on negatives, all we think about Muslims are that they are barbaric and uncivilised people whom we should not interact with. NO, we should bring into the limelight those poor souls who are Muslims and seek only peace, to live like the rest of us.
I have to admit you never hear the good stuff about what Muslims do in America. That said I think it is more important to focus on the bad so that Islam corrects itself in those areas. If we just talked about all the good stuff then nobody would care about the woman who got stoned to death.
unfortunately, its the same for many other religions right now. people are cynics by nature and will focus on the negatives for everything. for if we didn't the computer wouldn't have improved so much over the years, but I digress.
see, thats the biggest problem. what if the person who commits the crime is a teenager who doesn't (at the moment) know what he is going to do with his life. if he gets no second chance, then he is resigned to a fate worse than death. being a pariyah, and rather useless to society, before he has a chance of proving himself. this kid may actually be rather intelligent and good-natured, but his temporary disdain for the rules (that all teenagers face in their time) will undermine his future beyond repair.
These punishments are to keep order in society and they are not implemented blind folded there are few conditions to b met btw countries with sharia law implemented have very low crime rate. For amputation :- There must have been criminal intent to take private (not common) property. The theft must not have been the product of hunger, necessity, or duress. The goods stolen must: be over a minimum value, not haraam, and not owned by the thief's family. Goods must have been taken from custody (i.e., not in a public place). There must be reliable witnesses. Harsh punishments for extra marital sex are to stop civil discontentment. opposing to this there are also punishments for someone who falsely alleges some one of adultery. Also their are age limitations.
These punishments are to keep order in society and they are not implemented blind folded there are few conditions to b met btw countries with sharia law implemented have very low crime rate. For amputation :- There must have been criminal intent to take private (not common) property. The theft must not have been the product of hunger, necessity, or duress. The goods stolen must: be over a minimum value, not haraam, and not owned by the thief's family. Goods must have been taken from custody (i.e., not in a public place). There must be reliable witnesses. Harsh punishments for extra marital sex are to stop civil discontentment. opposing to this there are also punishments for someone who falsely alleges some one of adultery. Also their are age limitations.
Please, you have listed these in the thread earlier, and they have all been refuted.
For the amputation point, I'm going out on a limb to explain, pun intended. You claim it keeps order. Yes it does. It also leaves on scarred for life, unable to get back to a normal life, ostracization. Other punishments in democratic nations such as jailing and fines are less severe but achieve the same purpose, without all the aforementioned negative points. Yes, it might not be as heavy a punishment and lead to repeat offences, but repeat offences warrant harsher jail terms; it keeps escalating
There must have been criminal intent to take private (not common) property. The theft must not have been the product of hunger, necessity, or duress. The goods stolen must: be over a minimum value, not haraam, and not owned by the thief's family. Goods must have been taken from custody (i.e., not in a public place). There must be reliable witnesses.
Doesn't justify the degree of harshness itself.
Harsh punishments for extra marital sex are to stop civil discontentment.
To control one's own urges is to stop Nature in it's tracks as mentioned. It is a domestic affair that should not be brought into a public light and blown up.
Suppose I have an urge to Badmouth christianity in vatican (which is not allowed in Islam),This will enrage billion of christians wont it?
I don't see what this has to do with Sharia law.
Also, any person who I would consider a rational person might get angry at that, but if they full out attack you with guns or beat you up, they need help. Simply talking bad about something doesn't warrant violence.
So yes, it would probably make them mad, but if they attack you they've gone too far. I would expect them to tell you to leave, and if you refuse grab you and throw you out.
Urghh...yes we condemn all the mindless hating, but I find it hard not to hate on the certain minority. Fair enough, I hate any extremism really I just think sometimes people think a whole race, religion or group is extreme and thus hate every member of that race, religion or group.
As far as I know, nothing enrages a human more than two things. 1- Someone insults his religion.(Remember crusades?) 2- Someone messes with his woman.(First murder in human history was over a woman.)
As far as I know, nothing enrages a human more than two things. 1- Someone insults his religion.(Remember crusades?)
You mean back when the church controlled everything and used religion to cause wars and opress people? Back when trying to prove that what's in the Bible isn't real was cause for life inprisonment to death? In case you haven't noticed, this is 1000 years later, I'd have thought we would move beyond petty beliefs that have no backing.
If someone insults your religion, feel free to be mad. Hate them, for all I care. But if you take action against them simply for them saying what THEY believe, then you are no better than them.
2- Someone messes with his woman.(First murder in human history was over a woman.)
I doubt that the first murder in human history was over a women, and even if it was it can't really be proven. Yes, again, you can have emotions over this, but violence doesn't solve or change anything other than lowering yourself to their level.
This,this and this proves my point further more lineage is considered very important in Islam.
I could pull up many news reports of people being killed over religion too. Single instances don't mean anything. Yes, killings occur due to conflicts like those you listed, however they are pretty minimal and people who do it are unstable to being with usually.
