Majority Muslims want Sharia law in their countries: Study

[ju.da]

Not backed by logic? so what is your logic in forcing the Hijab?

 

[Pak-Man]

Not backed by logic? so what is your logic in forcing the Hijab?

I am saying that it is obligatory,there are many fatwas with examples from Quran and sunnah.I never said anything about forcing anyone.

 

[FaujHistorian]

if muslims want sharia law . then why all muslims send childerens to christan schools for better education . why all young muslims wanna go western countries for higher education .

Good point.

Here I'll share with you an "open secret".

Surveys like these are done by turds, who know nothing about hopes and dreams of ordinary Pakistani (or ordinary citizen of a Muslim or non-Muslim country).

Like you pointed out the very nature of Muslims when they send their kids to Christian schools, the same can be said about other aspects of their lives too.


OK. Here is the "secret".


Ordinary Pakistani may say "Sharia", but he really means a system that can deliver justice and fairness in social and economic spheres.

However to his horror of horrors, when he ends up getting is Mullah-ria Malaria that sickens our society ready to utterly destroy us.

Same thing happened in iran.

Poor Iranians were looking to get rid of Shah so they can get justice and fairness.

What they got has been islamo-fascism and the iron grip of Ayatullahs.


Hope this explains to some degree.

 

[notsuperstitious]

76% of South Asian Muslims favor executing those who leave Islam.

These are very extremist views, no wonder south asia is screwed.

 

[Pak-Man]

76% of South Asian Muslims favor executing those who leave Islam.

These are very extremist views, no wonder south asia is screwed.

>76% of South Asian Muslims favor executing those who leave Islam.
>these are exremist views
=south aisia is screwed
does this sound like a reasonable conclusion to you?

 

[notsuperstitious]

>76% of South Asian Muslims favor executing those who leave Islam.
>these are exremist views
=south aisia is screwed
does this sound like a reasonable conclusion to you?

Yes. The views are indicative of an extremist mentality that instead of following principle follows the rule of violence and power. So while all south Asian muslims will say islam is a peaceful religion and that there is no force is religion, yet 76% of them say kill those who leave islam. Such extremist mob mentality is indicative of a wider malaise of a violent and supremacist thinking that has landed south asia into this soup of disunity and hatred today.

The missing moral compass indeed is an issue in the sub-continent.

 

[Pak-Man]

Yes. The views are indicative of an extremist mentality that instead of following principle follows the rule of violence and power. So while all south Asian muslims will say islam is a peaceful religion and that there is no force is religion, yet 76% of them say kill those who leave islam. Such extremist mob mentality is indicative of a wider malaise of a violent and supremacist thinking that has landed south asia into this soup of disunity and hatred today.

The missing moral compass indeed is an issue in the sub-continent.

of course,all those that leave Islam should be killed.I'm asking;what did you mean by 'screwed'

 

[notsuperstitious]

of course,all those that leave Islam should be killed.I'm asking;what did you mean by 'screwed'

Ha ha ha, nothing mate, nothing.

 

[dabong1]

people (non-muslims) free to print cartoons and draw images of prophet mohammad?

NO.....the same way a muslim would not be allowed to incite hatred or start insulting other people faiths.

non-muslims becoming head of state?

NO..as far as i know...but lets at least put it into perspective and compare some the leading "democracy's".

Muslims, Jews or representatives of any Religion and/or Church other than the Church of England cannot ascend to the Throne; the Monarch HAS to belong to Anglican Church.
Those in Line of Succession, however, can belong to any religion or Church (apart from the Catholic one) without loosing their place in Line.
All members of the Royal Family, including the Monarch, are also free to marry representatives of any Religion or Church (again, apart from the Catholic one) without loosing their succession rights.
England (or rather, the United Kingdom) is not, by far, the only Monarchy that specifies the religion the Monarch must belong to; Spain, the Netherlands, Sweden, etc. all have such laws.

ahamdis are muslims?

Tell you the truth i have not got a clue.......but its a bit like me asking you why are sikhs classed as hindus and not as a seperate faith like the muslim or christians of india.

these are the important things.

No not really.......your trying to link insulting cartoons to muslim tolerance,a bit like me swearing at someone you love and when i get a negative reaction i start screaming how intolerant you are.

 

[niaz]

Most Muslims? I don't think so.. where did they survey this sort of study?



My God.. you really are ignorant..
Islam never emphasizes on forcing ANYTHING. Taliban (which, by the way, funny term considering it means 'student'.. it's a shame that we now talk about them as some sort of authority.) forced people into doing what they interpreted the Shariah Law as, with their guns and weapons. Islam never spread through the will of the sword, did it now? and now look what happened to Afghanistan.. they destroyed the cultural heritage amongst many other things which I can't be bothered to sum it up for you.

Explain me this, Islam emphasizes twice more about not lying, yet the issue you'd choose is to force 'Hijab', which by the way never states to cover the face, nor should it be all black. Various 'Shariah' states enforce black 'abbayas' which is wrong..
I'm okay with women wearing veils but covering the face is not something that should be forced upon.

�O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks close round them (when they go abroad). That will be better, so that they may be recognized and not annoyed. Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful.� (Quran 33:59)

Qur'an never states that it should be forced upon, it states that it would be better. It is up to the women to do so.
Note that I have emphasized on 'tell' and 'that will be better'.. what does it imply?

Main problem is that Islam has changed since the time of the holy Prophet (PBUH). You are quite right, most people are quite ignorant. Quran is there to be read, but people don't read it. Despite the fact that when ‘Hadith’ were collected most of the ‘Taba'een’ or second generation after the holy Prophet (PBUH) had also passed away, majority of Ulema consider ‘Hadith’ more authentic than the holy Quran which is undisputed word of ‘Allah’. I can quote 3 examples.

Penalty of adultery/fornication in the Quran is 100 lashes.

“24.2. The fornicatress and the fornicator – flog each of them with a hundred stripes; and do not let pity for them hold you back from carrying out God's law, if you truly believe in God and the Last Day; and let a group of believers witness their punishment”. (Sura AL Noor)

The Qur’an uses the same term, zinā, for both fornication and adultery. Whether the partners are married or unmarried, the Qur'ān considers every kind of illicit sexual intercourse as being zinā.
However based on a single Hadith many Ulema declare that if the women is married she should be stoned to death. This is Jewish not Islamic but Ulema give precedence to a solitary Hadith over the word of Allah!

Then the ruling on coercion.

“There is no compulsion in the Religion. The right way stands there clearly distinguished from the false. Hence, he who rejects the tāghūt (false deities, and powers of evil which institute patterns of faith and rule in defiance of God) and believes in God (as the only God, Lord and Object of Worship) has indeed taken hold of the firm, unbreakable handle; and God is All-Hearing, All-Knowing. (Al Baqra.” 2.256)

Nevertheless you would have seen that in Afghanistan & in Swat people were forced to keep beards and barber shops are being targeted by Taliban. This coercion is clear violation of the holy Quran edict.

Finally, the Almighty clearly says in Surat Al Nissa:

"O you who believe, do not consume each others' properties illicitly - only mutually acceptable transactions are permitted. You shall not kill yourselves. GOD is Merciful towards you" (4:29)

I find it amazing that SSP/LEJ claim that Deobandi Ulema have declared Shias ‘Wajib ul Qatl’ because they insult the Sehaba, however these groups have allied with the Taliban who train suicide bombers in direct contradiction to the word of Allah! This means that word of Allah has no importance but insult to Sehaba is!

As a born Muslim, I cannot in all honesty disagree with the imposition of Sharia, but I am dead against imposition of Sharia by the TTP/Salafi/Deobandi alliance because in my view these people have beliefs which are in direct contradiction to undisputed word of Allah as revealed to the holy Prophet(PBUH).

Islam of the TTP/Salafi/Deobandi is not the Islam of our prophet Mohammed (PBUH). I have no quarrel with people who follow TTP/Salafi/Deobandi maslak as everyone including myself is answerable to the Almighty on the day of Judgement and risks being thrown in the eternal fire of Hell if he/she were in error; but I would be dammed if I let these heretics impose their beliefs on me.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Tell you the truth i have not got a clue.......but its a bit like me asking you why are sikhs classed as hindus and not as a seperate faith like the muslim or christians of india.

That's is not true. The constitution considers them a separate faith and the wording is very clear though some trouble makers have tried to use the legalese to create confusion. This is the part of the constitution that is misconstrued, whereas its VERY clear Sikh religion is a separate religion in the wording itself.

providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus Explanation I The wearing and carrying of kirpans shall be deemed to be included in the profession of the Sikh religion Explanation II In sub clause (b) of clause reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious institutions shall be construed accordingly

Lets not spread misinformation.

Talking abt ahmadis BTW, they are not even considered a separate religion in Pakistan as they are not allowed to preach.

 

[Patriots]

Talking abt ahmadis BTW, they are not even considered a separate religion in Pakistan as they are not allowed to preach.

We are ready to consider them non Muslim but they insist that we consider to them as Muslim ... And how can we allow to preach against Islam ????
Their concepts are entirely different than our fundamental beliefs .............

You,can 'if' you have 'ijma'a' (consensus/majority votes) in the 'shura'a' (parliament).

Ijmaa is not voting & majlis e shura'a is very much different than parliament ................

 

[Patriots]

Armstrong Bhai, mujhe yeh BUZDIL kiya Hijab pahenay pur majboor kareingay.

Yeh begharat tou khud hijab pahantey hein. Aap nay dekha hoga in Taliban Busdiloan ko. TV pay aatein hain to muhn Chopaya howa hota hai. Lagta hai Hijab pehanaa huwa hai beygharatoan nay.

Phir kabhi yeh buzdil beyghairat Burka pehanay huway pakray jatein hein.

TTP men are not serving for Islam ... Those are peccant, pervert & black sheeps in Muslims ... Kindly don't mix to them with Muslims ... But you should not ridicule Islamic laws ... If something is mention in Quran & Hadith than we should follow it ... Verna Allah k samney jaza or saza ka zimedar har insan khud ho ga

 

[K-Xeroid]

I find it amazing that SSP/LEJ claim that Deobandi Ulema have declared Shias ‘Wajib ul Qatl’ because they insult the Sehaba, however these groups have allied with the Taliban who train suicide bombers in direct contradiction to the word of Allah! This means that word of Allah has no importance but insult to Sehaba is!

As a born Muslim, I cannot in all honesty disagree with the imposition of Sharia, but I am dead against imposition of Sharia by the TTP/Salafi/Deobandi alliance because in my view these people have beliefs which are in direct contradiction to undisputed word of Allah as revealed to the holy Prophet(PBUH).

Islam of the TTP/Salafi/Deobandi is not the Islam of our prophet Mohammed (PBUH). I have no quarrel with people who follow TTP/Salafi/Deobandi maslak as everyone including myself is answerable to the Almighty on the day of Judgement and risks being thrown in the eternal fire of Hell if he/she were in error; but I would be dammed if I let these heretics impose their beliefs on me.

You have clearly Mis-judged that part , Every Sunni Sect whether its Barelvi\Deobandi\Ahle hadees declared that the disrespect of Sahaba R.A or any muslim personality cannot be tolerated specially when its being done on the continuity basis . Here problem is that this tradition of "Wajib ul Qatl" and declaring "Kafir" to other was started by the barelvi Sect in sub-continent and as far as suicide bombing were concerned then various sources proved that it was our own Army who trained them during the soviat war . But I'm sure you have seperate excuse for them . Every different Sect have tried to Impose their Sharia even with miltancey , Its just a past of Tribal Taliban which makes them stronger then others.

 

[FaujHistorian]

....Talking abt ahmadis BTW, they are not even considered a separate religion in Pakistan as they are not allowed to preach.

There is a lot of misinformation on this topic of Pakistani Ahmadis.

First a disclaimer! Anyone who has seen my posts on this topic, knows very well that I am absolutely against the persecution of my fellow Pakistani-Ahmadis. Equal treatment means we must rid our laws dealing with Ahmadis.


Now to the main discussion.

In Pakistan Ahmadi vs. non-Ahamdi debate should be considered from different perspectives, otherwise you will end with one-eyed myopic stance, yelling and cursing at everyone who disagrees with you, or at their worst your posts will become a point-scoring $hit-Shoveling practice.


1. Social Perspective: There is no doubt that we the majority of Pakistani have denied Ahmadi citizens fair and just treatment that they deserve. We have put laws in to place to discriminate against them at pretty much every level. We have allowed physical attacks on their property and lives. This is totally not cool, and unallowed in any sane group of people. But then who says we as a group are sane. Sadly.


2. Religious angle - yes we the Pakistani majority has put these shameful laws on books about declaring one group as Kafir (denier of Islam).

---

But

Do you know that

-- Pakistani Ahamdi faith considers us the Muslim pakistanis as Kafir (denier of Islam)?

This is comic in someways and tragic in many ways that a new "reformer" from the sub-continent shows up and with one stroke of pen, declares all the existing Muslims as kafir.

And this is how the $hit started flying between Ahmadis and non-Ahmadis. Sadly.


My hope is that one day, us the majority Pakistanis will see the light and change the social treatment of Ahmadis.


My other hope is that one day Ahamdis too will start considering us the majority of Muslims as "Muslims".

I can hope for a positive change. Right?


peace