In Kerala, Inter-Faith Couple Lives in Fear, Plans to Request Chief Minister For Help

[ranjeet]

Yes I imported it from india She gives me good mileage

yeah good always knew Pakistani ones weren't good for sh!t.

 

[Judge]

Try this please go ahead with arrests you will a great favor please try this

Doing it for a long while now.

 

[HeadHunter]

yeah good always knew Pakistani ones weren't good for sh!t.

No actually Pakistani ones aren,t so tough and cannot bear gang rapes from their several owners

 

[SrNair]

Only Christians and Jews not others and that too is not encouraged like Divorce is allowed but not encouraged. No Muslims will not stay away from her. Okay do what you can do about it. You will arrest it would make things worse go ahead with arrests.

Till now they dont give complains or dont made it as a sensation.But if they try too much to threaten that couples then we can arrest them and we already did that in earlier times.This is not a banana republic.
Rule of land prevails here.Sorry you should think about in an oyt of box mentality.This is much different than your nation.

 

[SrNair]

Arrest in these kind of cases result in more motivation for Muslims rather than scaring them.

Did you actually think Muslims gonna disobey our laws?
Sorry mate you are wrong ,Absolutely wrong.In India things are much different.Last time Imam of Delhi Juma Masjid did something to protest against the non appeasement policy of new government and he was only successful in shooting his own foot.

 

[SrNair]

her troubles are because she is of indian citizenship... and india is a "secular" nation and not a hardcore socialist society... rss or tableeghi jamaat, they need to be dumped into the sea.

Dont drag RSS in to this completed unrelated topic.
FYI Communist parties played very well in appeasement policies.

 

[jamahir]

FYI Communist parties played very well in appeasement policies.

i agree, and which is why they lost power... they should forget elections-system and become a truly revolutionary party... they should take to direct-action.

Dont drag RSS in to this completed unrelated topic.

but we must present all the elements which have made kerala an oppressive place presently.

 

[Zarvan]

Did you actually think Muslims gonna disobey our laws?
Sorry mate you are wrong ,Absolutely wrong.In India things are much different.Last time Imam of Delhi Juma Masjid did something to protest against the non appeasement policy of new government and he was only successful in shooting his own foot.

You will soon have massive trouble with Muslims in India.

 

[SrNair]

i agree, and which is why they lost power... they should forget elections-system and become a truly revolutionary party... they should take to direct-action.



but we must present all the elements which have made kerala an oppressive place presently.

Dude.I am a Keralite so I know about the ground situation in
our state.If you are talking about Naxalites then your own Communist comarades successfully betrayed Naxals and killed them during emergency.Coalition Govt at that time did it very well.

In Kerala RSS is just an organisation in a growing stage.
But other side have a lot ofmoney through Hawala,Counterfeit note distribution, and more poeerful than RSS or their wings.They didnt have anything about this oppression

 

[SrNair]

You will soon have massive trouble with Muslims in India.

Haha Day dreams
Nothing more than that.You dont know anything about the patriotism of our Muslims.Except some fractional idiots ,others will live and die for India.

 

[SQ8]

I've lots to say...nothing against islam but about its interpretations but I'm sure if i post it here then it might hurt a few.
I've already said that god before everything else judges you by your deeds and not by anything else. He would not care if you're a monotheist or polytheist as long as you're a good human.
I think I've said enough.

I don't disagree with the finality of God in his judgements. If taken from an Islamic point of view he is referred to more by his merciful nature than anything else. So yes, this matter at the end remains with the girl and God.. but I found no need to add further on the clear theological basis for the matter going against the girl in the eyes of Muslims(vis a vis the edict in the Quran). I DO NOT SPEAK FOR GOD NOR HEAVEN FORBID I AM EVER WORTHY OF IT... this needed a shout. But I can speak on how the matter is addressed in the scripture which for all proofs evident has not changed for 99.99% of its recorded evidence both in printed and memorized form.

I read the post; I'm not impressed !

Its revisionism nothing more; those verses were revealed at the time of the Treaty of Hudaibya to define the relations between Muslims and Non Muslims but there is nothing to suggest in the rest of the Koran, in the rest of the same Chapter, in Prophetic Traditions or Historical Evidence from those times (to the best of my knowledge) that those injunctions were for that particular period and that period alone. There is, however, quite a bit to suggest otherwise.

Nowhere in the article did the lady mention any Prophetic Tradition because she probably knows that they go against her thesis and this is precisely the reason why Islam isn't just the Koran, its the Koran and the Prophetic Traditions. You have to understand that for Muslims the Koran is the word of God while the Prophetic Traditions are its interpretations; without the twain the other can't be understood which is exactly why both the Koran and the Prophetic Traditions form the basis for any and every mainstream School of Jurisprudence in Islam.

And this is coming from a lapsed Koranist - Me !

Rightly said. For a layman.. the idea is that the Quran is the manual and the meaning of that manual was demonstrated by the Prophet. However, whilst the latter being a diverse reported account and with inaccuracies and disagreements on its exactness by many.. the former is, has and will most likely continue to be in the same form as it was compiled.

So making sure we stick to the topic in this matter. A final repeating of my PoV and what seems to be that of the Bhatt in the room.

1. From a theological perspective the girl is not correct in her ideals and is essentially committing a sin. Which is the matter that has led to the antagonistic attitude towards her.

2. From a legal point of view, the laws of the state of India are supreme EVEN in the eyes of Islamic Jurisprudence. Hence, the community around her has it imperative on them to cease and desist all other actions except social boycott which is their own right that I believe even the state of India grants them.

 

[Armstrong]

Rightly said. For a layman.. the idea is that the Quran is the manual and the meaning of that manual was demonstrated by the Prophet. However, whilst the latter being a diverse reported account and with inaccuracies and disagreements on its exactness by many.. the former is, has and will most likely continue to be in the same form as it was compiled.

So making sure we stick to the topic in this matter. A final repeating of my PoV and what seems to be that of the Bhatt in the room.

1. From a theological perspective the girl is not correct in her ideals and is essentially committing a sin. Which is the matter that has led to the antagonistic attitude towards her.

2. From a legal point of view, the laws of the state of India are supreme EVEN in the eyes of Islamic Jurisprudence. Hence, the community around her has it imperative on them to cease and desist all other actions except social boycott which is their own right that I believe even the state of India grants them.

So you can actually read my posts.....you just choose not to respond to them !

You're such an arse !

On (1) I agree.

On (2) I'm not too sure; I don't know whether the State, even one formulated by Muslims, ought to tell the lady or anyone else for that matter whether she can or cannot marry another.

But then again if marriage is a social contract, as Islam views it to be, why can the State not stipulate the perimeters of that social contract ? Even States elsewhere do that because even when it comes to 'personal freedoms' that 'freedom' is qualified.

I suppose then it all comes down to social acceptability; the State chooses to outlaw incest does it not ? Even if the both are consenting adults it still refuses to recognize marriage in that case. Is that not infringing upon their personal freedom ?

No because the State draws a line somewhere and where that line is drawn is acceptable to the society in a democratic setup.

Why then is an issue created out of something when another society draws a line somewhere else in line with their different level of social acceptability ?

Looking it purely from a Secular point of view - How can we presuppose that there is only 'one' right way to do things in things which are extremely opinion based ?

This is a conundrum then is it not ? One of many that Iqbal clamored on about and one that I believe Pakistan was created to provide the platform to answer questions like these about.

 

[SQ8]

So you can actually read my posts.....you just choose not to respond to them !

You're such an arse !

On (1) I agree.

On (2) I'm not too sure; I don't know whether the State, even one formulated by Muslims, ought to tell the lady or anyone else for that matter whether she can or cannot marry another.

But then again if marriage is a social contract, as Islam views it to be, why can the State not stipulate the perimeters of that social contract ? Even States elsewhere do that because even when it comes to 'personal freedoms' that 'freedom' is qualified.

I suppose then it all comes down to social acceptability; the State chooses to outlaw incest does it not ? Even if the both are consenting adults it still refuses to recognize marriage in that case. Is that not infringing upon their personal freedom ?

No because the State draws a line somewhere and where that line is drawn is acceptable to the society in a democratic setup.

Why then is an issue created out of something when another society draws a line somewhere else in line with their different level of social acceptability ?

Looking it purely from a Secular point of view - How can we presuppose that there is only 'one' right way to do things in things which are extremely opinion based ?

This is a conundrum then is it not ? One of many that Iqbal clamored on about and one that I believe Pakistan was created to provide the platform to answer questions like these about.

I just choose to ignore you because I know you worship me in secret and have a shrine for me.. and spend hours upon hours every day stalking the internet trying to ascertain my identity so you can ask me for my shoes which you will keep on that shrine. @Hyperion will testify to this.

(2) . The obligations for the Muslim, the Islamic state are already outlined by me in the previous post. And these are all just from the Quran which as we both agree is reliable as compared to the traditions.

 

[Armstrong]

I just choose to ignore you because I know you worship me in secret and have a shrine for me.. and spend hours upon hours every day stalking the internet trying to ascertain my identity so you can ask me for my shoes which you will keep on that shrine. @Hyperion will testify to this.

Worshiping you ? Shrine ?

I'm not a Karachiwalaa and you're no Altaf Bhai !

(2) . The obligations for the Muslim, the Islamic state are already outlined by me in the previous post. And these are all just from the Quran which as we both agree is reliable as compared to the traditions.

The Koran doesn't really talk about an Islamic State or even a State for that matter; its more about Islam and Community as opposed to Islam and State. So I don't know what obligations would a State have in this matter.

I'm still figuring out the whole State thing.

Fiqh on the other hand, which is, lets be fair, scholarly deductions from the Koran and the Traditions, more than something written in the Primary Sources, may have a different opinion of things.

But because I firmly believe that rigorous and informed Ijtihad is required to come up with a Fiqh more in line with the present times or at least to significantly update the existing Fiqhs; I'm not too keen on accepting whatever Fiqh says at face value.

 

[SQ8]

Worshiping you ? Shrine ?

I'm not a Karachiwalaa and you're no Altaf Bhai !



The Koran doesn't really talk about an Islamic State or even a State for that matter; its more about Islam and Community as opposed to Islam and State. So I don't know what obligations would a State have in this matter.

I'm still figuring out the whole State thing.

Fiqh on the other hand, which is, lets be fair, scholarly deductions from the Koran and the Traditions, more than something written in the Primary Sources, may have a different opinion of things.

But because I firmly believe that rigorous and informed Ijtihad is required to come up with a Fiqh more in line with the present times or at least to significantly update the existing Fiqhs; I'm not too keen on accepting whatever Fiqh says at face value.

That is the most dangerous reason for me to ignore you; you worship me regardless, just last week I heard rumours of a shipment of 5000 Gendas and 200 agarbattis to a certain Butt house.. to be used to garland a room and a poster with my profile page from here. Neighbors report hearing Hymns of "Oscariyaa.. Wawwooo.. Oscariyaa.. Wawoo."


The question for the Islamic state is not essentially on the imperative on its existence ..but what might be done in such an existence. In either case the Quran does address issues that would come up within a society of Muslims.