Malaysia imposes dress code for non-muslims, THE FRENCH WAY

Well, at heart the only reason men and women want sex is to pass on our genes. Rape is natural, being simply propegation by any means, especially for an inferior male.
Pleasure is just a motivator, power....well that's interesting. Even consensual, normal sex acts are linked with the expression of power (especially for men, but what woman doesn't like that feeling of control in knowing that a man is attracted to her?) and I'm not precisely what purpose that serves. Perhaps it has something to do with the struggle to court a mate?
 
Lucysnow said:
Quote: Although 'rape' is certainly a non-consentual violation of another individual, I
see it as a very natural behavior (especially among primates) and it does
serve a purpose as far as survival of genetics is concerned.

And how does rape serve survival of genetics? Are you referring to man attempting to pass on his genes? By the way I am not picking an argument, simply curious about you position and its basis.

Kind of the reverse actually. The most common manifestation is the genes
trying to survive by utilizing a male to impregnate a female. The more times
that genes can drive this type of behavior, the greater the chance that they
will survive another generation (regardless of the vessel they use).
 
So how do you link this genetic drive with the rapists need to debase his victim ? Or do you see them as two separate manifestations? I mean some rapes are forced anal or oral sex with undue violence.

Xev: I know what you mean about power and sex. I am most attracted to men who display their power (the use of power) in one way or another. Maybe the purpose of power in sexual attraction is a way of pinpointing the alpha male, the strongest, healthiest, smartest or wealthiest. Yes most, if not all, women enjoy their power to attract a male, maybe this too is a manifestation of some genetic need to have a large number of specimens to choose from thereby having a chance to choose the best amongst the group. *smiles* OOPs I've just discovered why I have yet to settle on a mate. I also agree that it is the inferior weak male who succumbs to rape.
 
Lucysnow:
That's the problem with a strictly "attempt to pass on genes at any cost" approach. Why, after all, rape and then kill a woman?
I think there is something more involved.

I am most attracted to men who display their power (the use of power) in one way or another.

And they to women. I know the "in one way or another".
I adore musicians and intellectuals, not so much the "cocky, wealthy alpha male" - but it all goes under the same principle. Find someone good enough to have kids with.

*smiles* OOPs I've just discovered why I have yet to settle on a mate.

*Chuckles*
Too many 'potentials' around?
 
Too many of the WRONG potentials. I mean sometimes they are strong but not smart, sometimes wealthy but not healthy...you get the picture. I agree with your assessment of the 'cocky wealthy alpha male' the wall street types are often lacking in every conceivable way other than making a killing. They dont create anything but make money by what others have created (middle men). And yes I am generalizing of course. Artists and intellectuals tend to have the most passion and produce that which sustains the soul (and yes of course again I generalize). Power must come with affinity and sense of unwavering principles for it to be attractive. There isn't anything worse than seeing a man (or anyone for that matter) compromise his principles out of weakness, a complete turn-off (they dihonor themselves). You know one man who I admire greatly is the late Ernest Shakleton, he attempted the impossible and sacrificed himself for the good of the men under his charge (leadership), his determination under conditions of complete degradation. Under a reality that threatend to strip strong men of all their dignity he showed courage and taught it by example, where there was no hope he created it and I simply LOVE that. That really gets me going. He endured and it was his principles that helped him persevere. When the Endurance sank he took her with him. The person I have my eye on now is very very intelligent, adventurous, humorous and there is great affinity between us, but I am waiting to see if he is healthy (emotionally, psychologically and in spirit). If he proves that then there is potential for something more than friendship.
 
Last edited:
Scientific reason to legalise rape is found just now :

Although 'rape' is certainly a non-consentual violation of another individual, I see it as a very natural behavior (especially among primates) and it does serve a purpose as far as survival of genetics is concerned.



Anyone, female/male does not want to undergo the natural and scientific propagation of gene process (wrongly being called as 'rape') should cover themselves from head to toe.

Next step in evolution :

The female vagina to start secreting an enzyme whenever an unwanted dick enters and immediately gets disolved by the enzyme.


More scientifc approaches to follow.

Rapists, Feminists and Evolutionists - Unite. Legalise Rape (two way) now. (*pulls the nearby female on the street for carrying out the natural duty of propagating genes*)
 
Quote: Next step in evolution :
The female vagina to start secreting an enzyme whenever an unwanted dick enters and immediately gets disolved by the enzyme

LOL. I love it! What a superb idea!
 
Lucysnow said:
So how do you link this genetic drive with the rapists need to debase his victim ? Or do you see them as two separate manifestations? I mean some rapes are forced anal or oral sex with undue violence.

Well, I only have a hypothesis at this point. The genes that drive the behavior
to rape are not 'sentient'. 'sentience' and the ability to 'decide' come from a product of genes (the brain) but not the genes themselves. If said product
(the brain) is not aligned with the purpose behind the drive to rape then the raping vessel is simply 'defective' (the genes of which are not likely to survive
past the current generation if the 'wrong hole' is chosen or if the rapee is killed).
 
skywalker said:
I am not sure where did the idea of miswak came frome. But it never was or is an order for muslims to use it. I am not sure if it was meant for pun or to piss Syrian off. But I disagree I haven't heard about it never. Using miswak should be onces choice and if some one wants to do it, fine if not then there is no sin or restrictions. Time changes and people should modrenise them self as long as they don't try to change the original writings of Quran. When it comes to Hadiths I like MARKX's idea and follow his logic. He simply don't belelive in hadith because so and so said it, and if it confilicts with logic and etc etc. He got his own criteria. Anyways I feel really sorry when PS use this profound langauge. I hope he understands the true meaning of respect and religion. Syrian if you really are muslim then you shoulnd't even call *sharmotta* by this name since it is not your place to judge. Isn't that what Allah/God taught us?

Skywalker,
I believe very similarly to you. I bring the Miswak issue not to "put Islam down", but to make an important point in regards to interpretations of Sunnah and Hadith (An area that have caused much more harm than help, really Hadith have been the downfall of Islam and the segregation of muslims).

First off, Miswak is an excellent tool for dental health, and 1500 years ago, when people died at the age of 40 due to rotten teath (seriously people teath used to rott and kill them before the rest of body is ready to fail)...Anyways, in such backward times, the noble prophet introduced dental hygene, an unheard of concept. Does the prophet expect us to freeze his information and do as is in the name of Sunnah...Absolutely not. Does he accept us to denounce a western invention called toothpaste and stay with a tree twig, I don't think so, but the Hadith sure comes to a lot of people as if Prophet Muhammed is setting and defining our way for dental hygene.

The prophet have indeed introduced the concept, and even defined in detail what he deems to be appropriate application for the concept. Other applications are available though that were discovered hundreds of years later and Prophet Muhammed couldn't have known the future, because he was just a human....due to this, Prophet Mohammed's saying are incomplete and unapplicable. Only god the maker of this universe knows the past, future, and everything else and thus could make universal statements. The prophet statements outside of the "inspired times" are not god's words.

Sunnah in arabic means way. I believe that we all should be actively carving the Sunnah (way) of OUR lives, and not merely following the Sunnah of the Prophet life. Followers are mere robots and unbefitting of being accountable creatures....thus not fit for a heaven or hell. Heaven and Hell are earned destinies that we work hard for. Each sequential decision takes us toward our destiny. If god expects us to follow what Muhammed said to the letter, then god wouldn't describe us in the holly Quran as:
"You were created in toil"
Toil (Arabic = Kabad) literally means an undecisive state, unstable state, internal struggle, confusion, agony, and in need to make decisions. We use the word Kabad in arabic to describe hard labor, steep striving, struggle.

If we are indeed to only be following a set of ancient rules, then were is the struggle? Where is responsbility? and where is the accountability?

Following a Sunnah in my view is indeed "Shirk" or multiplicity in worshipping. The reason being, if we are following something because the prophet ordained it, then we must expect our reward from the prophet and not from god, and we all know that this is wrong in Islam.

In short, each on of us needs to take their own way, and we hope to stay close to the straight way, SIRAT MOSTAQEEM, and while the prophet have indeed set the moral bar for us with his examplatory life, he definetly have not the set the ceiling nor even defined the specifics and diversities of every person lives. Prophet Muhammed have only done as he saw fit for his life and he is accountable for his life and his decisions to god.
 
Quote: If we are indeed to only be following a set of ancient rules, then were is the struggle? Where is responsbility? and where is the accountability?

Damn good post. True enough, why would a god want an automaton when its creation is endowed with free-will? There are laws of nature that bind man but these laws are non-negotiable to a large degree. What we are free to do is make choices, discern, throw off yokes, question.
 
Lucysnow said:
True enough, why would a god want an automaton when its creation is endowed with free-will? There are laws of nature that bind man but these laws are non-negotiable to a large degree. What we are free to do is make choices, discern, throw off yokes, question.

I didn't forget about you Lucy, but it takes longer to respond to your posts, because I have to think a bit harder....don't want to get myself trapped in my own arguments.. ;)

First off, thanks for moderating this one sided discussion with PMS. I have said before that you could be making matters worse, if you're not carefull, but I take this back, because your input is definetly providing needed juice to the discussion and allowing me to clarify my position.

You have asked me one personal question in your earlier post. It was in regards to "Why I'm trying to get PMS to accept me in a bikini?". I think you have nailed the issue on the head with your question. I seriously don't think that I'm trying to get PMS approval nor is he trying to get my approval. Our sour discussion is a bad case of what happens when you get too upclose and "invade another person private space". PMS as a human first and a muslim second needs his own private space to think, manuever, change his mind, ect...So do I...And so do all humans...Much like the earth is protected by the atmosphere, so are we humans protected by our private space.

Now, the issue was not whether PMS approves of my attire or not, it was him imposing his own thoughts right within the serenity and peace of my vulnerable yet "holding it's ground firm" personal space. His remarks much like a storm would do have definetly caused some turbulance to my "personal" environment, and it's only second nature that his attacks would trigger an immediate respond from me in an effort to restablize myself. Am I too sensitive?, perhaps, has my buttons been pushed?, I think so, do I seek to have him take back his statements or change his mind?, Hell no, not anymore than I seek that a donkey start speaking human or a human to start understanding dog bark. By any means, please don't confuse my responce in my defence to imply that I'm trying to convince him that BIKINIS are the way to be and that everyone should wear them. On the contrary, I would actually reject the same argument that ALL women should dress in Bikini if that was brought by someone else. He also have stated many times that he doesn't push Hijab on other women, yet he can't help but to state that the origin of his belief is not himself, but a god that have dictated so.

Do you see what is so dangerous about his claim and the fundemental difference between my arguments and his? While I'm comfortable in a bikini for such and such reasons (That I have stated to the best of my knowldge and rested my case), he is pushing Hijab on the premises that god is requiring it. He even declines to admit that the issue of Hijab is his PERSONAL view, in which I would have greatly respected, but on the contrary, he mocked the effort of thinking, stating views, and spewed a bunch of Quranic verses to shove his point down our throats further. He insists so much that his attacks on me are so warranted for by god as if he had some secrete meeting with god that I was not invited to where he received all his enlightement in regards to how women should dress and that I PERSONALLY will go to hell.

I guess I hate generalization, although I'm sure that I make my own share of them by mistake I can assure you, perhaps lack of eloquence on my part, but nothing more.

In his(PMS) weak defence, I have also crossed my boundary and entered his personal space with my repeated arguments concerning the fact that there is no religious basis to back his claim that "HIJAB is a requirement for all females". I should basically say, I don't agree with you, but I respect your view, yet he continues to roam around this site invading people's privacies and asserting that the views his bring are divine in nature... What should I say? He really brought it (my wraith) on himself being a dumb male and all and squeezing his head in a futile discussion pertaining to female wear. Even my husband thinks 100 times before he dares comment on my body or wear, and the idiot PMS think that he is god gift to all women coming here and painting all females with his boring brush. I can understand you and XEV being hot blooded about female wear, isssues, and all, but it's clearly not the man business to dictate the wardrobe for all women kind...In summary, my arguments are being exhuasted toward negating his general claim that I and other females should be dressed in some way of his design, thus he is the one imposing requirements, so again, I'm on defence here and he's clearly on the attack.
 
I do see the difference between your argument and his. I am not sure how the religious decide what god wants for or from them. But even his idea that it is ordained from god is a personal view because as you pointed out god did not open the heavens and clue him. All he has to go on is doctrine, but I wont get into that because I dont know anything about the Quran. (smiles) Don't worry about going to hell Flores...I'm sure to be there for company. I took some Dante test on another thread and they have me banished to one of the deepest levels of hell (City of Dis) where the heretics reside...I'm sure you will be in the first or second circle along with all the beach lovers.
 
I want to see medicine woman's posts. Does any one knows what happened to her? Where did she go?
 
Why don't you look for her name somewhere in this forum and click her name, you'll find where and what she posted last. You can also send her a pm. She hasn't made an appearance on this thread.
 
Proud_Muslim:

The statistics on rape you published are misleading in more ways than one, it seems.

Even if we accept the figures, the US does not come in at number 1, because you didn't give the <b>per capita</b> figures for the incidence of rape. You gave raw numbers. The list reads as follows when you look at rapes per 1000 people:

1. South Africa 1.21 per 1000 people
2. Montserrat 0.83 per 1000 people
3. Australia 0.8 per 1000 people
4. Seychelles 0.8 per 1000 people
5. Canada 0.75 per 1000 people
6. Zimbabwe 0.49 per 1000 people
7. Jamaica 0.49 per 1000 people
8. Dominica 0.34 per 1000 people
9. United States 0.32 per 1000 people

The US comes in at number 9 on this scale. That's still bad, right? BUT WAIT! What's this note at the bottom of the statistics, which you so conveniently ignored? It says:

[size=+1]"Crime statistics are often better indicators of prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime, than actual prevalance."[/size]

This confirms what I've been saying all along.

Syria doesn't even appear on the list. Why? Is it because rapes don't happen in Syria? Is it really the case that there are only 4-5 rapes per year in Syria, with its population of 17 million? That would give a rate of 0.0000003 per 1000 people, as compared to 0.32 per 1000 people for the US. Are people in Syria really so much more moral than citizens of the US, or could it be that you are lying to us, Proud_Muslim?

I'll tell you why Syria doesn't appear on the list. The reason is this:

[size=+1]Syria doesn't collect rape statistics.[/size]

That's right. They don't even bother to publish the stats. I'm sure the smart people here can think of possible reasons for that.

So, how are things <b>really</b> in Syria. Perhaps the following can give us an idea:

[size=+2]Violence Against Women Seen Rife in Syria[/size]
By Sultan Sleiman (Reuters, 31 May 1999)

...Physicians, lawyers and activists say domestic violence, sexual or physical, and discrimination against women is common among conservative Syria's 16.7 million people, particularly in rural areas. Ignorance, machismo and tribal customs which favour men fuel the violence and combine to make the lot of many Syrian women a miserable one.

VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ON THE RISE

Although there are no official estimates of domestic violence or rape, activists say the victims number in the thousands. Mustapha Habash, head of the emergency department at Al-Muwasat hospital in Damascus, says he sees three to four victims of violence each month. Few take that step, since it draws in the police. ...

Discrimination against women is also a serious problem in Syria, activists say. Many girls are denied education and proper health care by parents who favour their brothers. "Our society is very violent. It is male-dominated, aggressive and suppressive," said cardiologist Ahmad at-Taqi, a former deputy. "The number of girls who suffer heart problems is equal to the number of boys but 92 percent of surgery is performed on boys simply because traditions say that a girl child can be replaced," he added. The pro-government General Union of Women (GUW) in Syria recently published a 1995 survey that showed 35.27 percent of Syria's population were illiterate and most of those -- 25.87 percent-were female. Some women feel the only way they can keep their husbands in a society that believes it is better to be with any man than alone is to place themselves under the surgeon's knife. Mayyada Hinaidy, a female plastic surgeon, said more than half the women she operates on come to her under psychological pressure from their husbands. "Imagine a woman after 20 years of marriage, during which she bore 10 kids, coming to you and asking you to restore her youth because her husband has started to complain about her shape," she said. "It's tragic because this woman's future relies on my ability to fix what was destroyed by nature," Hinaidy added.

LAWS DO NOT FAVOUR WOMEN

Hanan Nijmeh, a lawyer and women's rights activist, said Syrian laws do not offer much protection. Lax legislation on domestic affairs, such as divorce and rape, ease the path of violence against women. "Syrian society, like other Arab societies, is a patriarchy in which there is a struggle between what is traditional and what is new. So violence against women in places where illiteracy is high is more than in areas where education is widespread," she said. Nijmeh said a woman in Syria always feels threatened by divorce, as a husband can just dispense with her without giving compensation. She cannot grant her children Syrian nationality if she marries a foreigner even if they were born there. But perhaps the most controversial law against women, and one common in Arab countries, says a rapist can be acquitted if he marries his victim, Nijmeh said. "This way, the woman suffers three times. First when she was raped, secondly when she is married to her rapist and thirdly when he inevitably divorces her after a few months," she added.

While activists and GUW officials slam some Syrian legislation as unfair to women, they say things have improved during the 30-year term of President Hafez al-Assad. "Though we are satisfied with the woman's situation we have passed many proposals to parliament to change unfair laws," GUW member Raghida al-Ahmad told Reuters. "We have 26 women in the 250-member parliament and two ministers in the 36-member cabinet. There are 132 women judges and 16 percent of lawyers and 44 percent of teachers are women," Ahmad said.

Now, I personally <b>suspect</b> that, in fact, Syria does not have the worst record among countries of the Middle East. With its largely secular government, it seems to be making slow progress in areas of human rights. But ignoring the remaining problems won't make them go away.
 
James R said:
Proud_Muslim:

The statistics on rape you published are misleading in more ways than one, it seems.

Even if we accept the figures, the US does not come in at number 1, because you didn't give the <b>per capita</b> figures for the incidence of rape. You gave raw numbers. The list reads as follows when you look at rapes per 1000 people:

1. South Africa 1.21 per 1000 people
2. Montserrat 0.83 per 1000 people
3. Australia 0.8 per 1000 people
4. Seychelles 0.8 per 1000 people
5. Canada 0.75 per 1000 people
6. Zimbabwe 0.49 per 1000 people
7. Jamaica 0.49 per 1000 people
8. Dominica 0.34 per 1000 people
9. United States 0.32 per 1000 people

Oh I see, you want to look at the statistics from per capita now ? this is very misleading, the stats I provided talks abot how many RAPES happened in the whole country, and let us see who is first:


Country Description Amount
1. United States 89,110 (1999)
2. South Africa 53,008 (2000)
3. Canada 24,049 (2000)
4. Australia 15,630 (2000)
5. India 15,468 (1999)
6. Mexico 13,061 (2000)
7. United Kingdom 8,593 (2000)
8. France 8,458 (2000)
9. Germany 7,499 (2000)
10. Russia 6,978 (2000)
11. Korea, South 6,139 (2000)
12. Spain 5,664 (2000)
13. Zimbabwe 5,567 (2000)
14. Thailand 4,020 (2000)
15. Venezuela 2,931 (2000)
16. Poland 2,399 (2000)
17. Italy 2,336 (2000)
18. Japan 2,260 (2000)
19. Colombia 1861 (2000)
20. Netherlands 1648 (2000)
21. Indonesia 1372 (2000)
22. Jamaica 1304 (2000)
23. Papua New Guinea 1295 (2000)

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_rap

That is right, you guessed it, it is the U.S.A


The US comes in at number 9 on this scale. That's still bad, right? BUT WAIT! What's this note at the bottom of the statistics, which you so conveniently ignored? It says:
[size=+1]"Crime statistics are often better indicators of prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime, than actual prevalance."[/size]

INDEED, and that is why I still believe the USA is no.1 in rape because according to the FBI, for every 1 rape that is reported, 10 are NOT reported.

Syria doesn't even appear on the list. Why? Is it because rapes don't happen in Syria? Is it really the case that there are only 4-5 rapes per year in Syria, with its population of 17 million? That would give a rate of 0.0000003 per 1000 people, as compared to 0.32 per 1000 people for the US. Are people in Syria really so much more moral than citizens of the US, or could it be that you are lying to us, Proud_Muslim?

Since you CANT support your claim with ANY evidence, then I would assume I AM RIGHT...we dont have this problem, we dont hear about it in the press nor from people....we dont sense it in our society, our girls GO SAFE to their schools and their work, we have 33 WOMEN MPs and the issue was NEVER raised in the parliement...it is to do with the MORALITY of the people and of course the DRESS CODE.

I'll tell you why Syria doesn't appear on the list. The reason is this:

[size=+1]Syria doesn't collect rape statistics.[/size]
That's right. They don't even bother to publish the stats. I'm sure the smart people here can think of possible reasons for that.

And where is your EVIDENCE ???? :rolleyes:

So, how are things <b>really</b> in Syria. Perhaps the following can give us an idea:

That is the only article you managed to find after long tiring GOOGLING !! or maybe this retard spookz posted it first, but anyhow, even if I am going to take this article seriously ( despite the enormus BS in it ) does this article talks about RAPE GOING WILD IN SYRIA ??????

Now, I personally <b>suspect</b> that, in fact, Syria does not have the worst record among countries of the Middle East. With its largely secular government, it seems to be making slow progress in areas of human rights. But ignoring the remaining problems won't make them go away.

Our main problem is POLITICAL HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES, imprisonment without trail, political corrution and so on....it is this SECULAR SHITY government that is causing all this problems, whenevr I switch on the Syrian satellite TV , I see secualr BS and secualr athiest writers preaching their poison, I see wild parties and half naked women dancing..it is systematic campaign to corrupt our youth and drive them away from Islam...but it is not working...soon, INSHA ALLAH, we will kick those bastards away from government and we will have an ISLAMIC STATE.
 
Proud_Muslim said:
Our main problem is POLITICAL HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES, imprisonment without trail, political corrution and so on....it is this SECULAR SHITY government that is causing all this problems, whenevr I switch on the Syrian satellite TV , I see secualr BS and secualr athiest writers preaching their poison, I see wild parties and half naked women dancing..it is systematic campaign to corrupt our youth and drive them away from Islam...but it is not working...soon, INSHA ALLAH, we will kick those bastards away from government and we will have an ISLAMIC STATE.
So is this prophecy of the Islamic State in Syria? Will you then leave the West to return to your homeland? Could you bear to live in a true Islamic State? Could you bear to leave behind the comforts and freedoms which you enjoy in the West, to live in a true Islamic State? What if (hypothetically speaking) the current government is overthrown and Syria is then ruled by a new government with similar beliefs to the Taliban? Would you be jumping for joy at the notion of such a true Islamic State? Would you be giving away your satellite TV, computer and radio to embrace this true Islamic State?

You seriously think that issues such as imprisonment without trial and corruption will not exist in a true khilafah? So you'd agree with the implementation of Sharia Law as a true Islamic State cannot really exist without it? So with the implementation of the Sharia Law, you'd agree with the rules which deem it essential for a woman to have 4 male witnesses to the rape for her story to be believed? Islam is a complete way of life in an Islamic State. Therefore, would you be rushing away from the West and back to Syria to embrace the Khilafah?

Somehow I doubt it :rolleyes:.
 
Bells said:
So is this prophecy of the Islamic State in Syria? Will you then leave the West to return to your homeland?

Absolutely, I cant wait...even my western wife is fed up and she wants to move to more safe MORALE Muslim country.

Could you bear to live in a true Islamic State? Could you bear to leave behind the comforts and freedoms which you enjoy in the West, to live in a true Islamic State?

I assume you think true islamic state means TALIBAN-STYLE state, right ? :rolleyes:

The Taliban were bunch of illitrate backward animals, they never knew what the outside world looks like, they never seens any women apart from thier mothers and sisters...they never studied anyother book than the Quran...etc.

The people who will build TRUE ISLAMIC state are those WESTERN-EDUCATED muslims who absorbed the GREAT THINGS the west have and will apply them in an Islamic framework.

In our MODERN TRUE islamic state, everyone will be given the right to free speech, free elections, free press ( as long as it abides by the cultural and religious sensitivity of the country ), women will be re-given the rights prophet muhammad (pbuh) gave 1400 years ago: the right to vote, the right for education....etc

What if (hypothetically speaking) the current government is overthrown and Syria is then ruled by a new government with similar beliefs to the Taliban?

I would take the gun and fight them to death, I dont want taliban-style govrnment..I advice you to read what I am reading now, a book called TALIBAN by Ahmad rashid to understand those people and where they came from, we dont have afghanistan long civil war, we dont have the appaling rate of illitracy in afghanistan...etc.

I believe no muslim state will ever imitate those backward thugs...NEVER.

Would you be jumping for joy at the notion of such a true Islamic State? Would you be giving away your satellite TV, computer and radio to embrace this true Islamic State?

You see bells, you think true islamic state means giving away satellite TV, PC, radio..etc!! this is gross misinformation, gross misunderstanding of Islam and its teachings....

Look at Saudi arabia for example, they are NOT true islamic state because they mix backward beduin culture with islam but yet they are very techincally developed, they have TVs, Shopping malls...PCs....etc.

Bells, Islam is NOT against modernity, Islam PRODUCES modernity, those who are against modernity are people who lives in the mentality of the 7th century, something most muslims reject.

if look at the taliban regime, only 2 Muslim countries out of 57 recognized them ( for political reasons ) the rest did not even bother to comment on those thugs in their media.

You seriously think that issues such as imprisonment without trial and corruption will not exist in a true khilafah?

Indeed bells, in true ISLAMIC KHILAFAH, such things will never happen because we will have SHARIA LAW governs our lives where everyone's rights are protected by ALLAH'S LAWS...who dares to violate these laws ???

So you'd agree with the implementation of Sharia Law as a true Islamic State cannot really exist without it?

Yes, but what is your understanding of sharia law ?? dont tell me stoning and choping off hands for theft because Sharia law is not only about that.

So with the implementation of the Sharia Law, you'd agree with the rules which deem it essential for a woman to have 4 male witnesses to the rape for her story to be believed?

Where did you get this BS from bells ?? where in the Quran Allah said woman have to bring 4 witness to report rape ???

Let us look at how Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him dealt with the rapists:

Narrated Wa'il ibn Hujr:

"When a woman went out in the time of the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) for prayer, a man attacked her and overpowered (raped) her. She shouted and he went off, and when a man came by, she said: That (man) did such and such to me. And when a company of the Emigrants came by, she said: That man did such and such to me. They went and seized the man whom they thought had had intercourse with her and brought him to her.

She said: Yes, this is he. Then they brought him to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him). When he (the Prophet) was about to pass sentence, the man who (actually) had assaulted her stood up and said: Apostle of Allah, I am the man who did it to her.

He (the Prophet) said to the woman: Go away, for Allah has forgiven you. And about the man who had intercourse with her, he said: Stone him to death.

He also said: He has repented to such an extent that if the people of Medina had repented similarly, it would have been accepted from them. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 38, Number 4366)"

This tradition leaves absolutely no doubt of the validity of the evidence of women in such cases. It establishes, first, that in a case of rape, the solitary evidence of the raped woman, in the absence of their evidence, is considered sufficient to convict the rapist of the crime; and second, that the evidence of women is admissible in such cases, and that there are no plausible grounds not to admit their evidence in the Islamic Shari`ah.

In the light of the above hadith,it shows that the evidence of a *single* person, the female victim, can be sufficient to convict someone of rape according to the teachings of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.)

Islam is a complete way of life in an Islamic State. Therefore, would you be rushing away from the West and back to Syria to embrace the Khilafah?

and because Islam is complete way of life I would be going there, nothing more beautiful than living in TRUE MODERATE MORAL CRIME-FREE ISLAMIC STATE.

Somehow I doubt it

Why ? is it because you think your western culture superior over mine ???

:rolleyes:
 
Back
Top