salams,

i dont think muslims are ready for an islamic state. Where ever i come upon muslims they're arguing and dividing their communities on the basis of madhabs, sects, race, ethnicities. Perfect examples of this are the masjids, one masjid for the gujis (but guji are very inclusive, their masjids are usually full of white converts aswell, a rarity in indopak masjids), pakistani masjids, Bengali, Arab etc. We can't pray in the same masjid, or do Eid on the same day, are we ready for an islamic state think not!

You wrote:

Joie de Vivre wrote:

A meditation on just two Islamic states.

The article contains a few fallacies, but where it really lose credibility is with this paragraph:

Shpetim Mahmudi teaches at the University of Tetovo and belongs to the Bektashi order of Sufi mystics. The Bektashis are part of a distinct branch of Shia Islam, and many self-identify as the most liberal on Earth. These are the last people in the Islamic world who will join any kind of jihad. They drink alcohol, for instance, and they are not obligated to pray five times every day in a mosque. Bektashi women don't wear oppressive clothing, and their feelings of openness toward people of other faiths is genuine. Naturally they are detested by Wahhabis and other radical Sunnis as much as they would be if they were pagans or Jews.

The author has his own prejudices to fight before trying to report an an impartial witness.

By talking about the prayers, does he mean they do not need to pray at all, or just in a mosque? I think he means the latter, but it is phrased as to imply the former.

He is too easy in using terms such as radical (ie anyone who he disagrees with) and oppressive (anything he disagrees with).

Hijabis don't wear oppresive clothing either, it forces men to look at their character rather than their attractiveness.
Who is this author by the way, is he a neo-con?

[quote=Courage]OK A: It doesn't say Courage on my birth certificate

hahahahahahahaah!!!!!

Courage wrote:

OK, mate, let me explain some stuff to you. Many countries make draconian laws and then hide behind the Sharia. If you challenge the Saudi government on why it treats women like it does, the answer you'll get is that the laws are based on Shariah, which is bull! I really felt like finishing that word but I don't know if Admin would allow that.
Anyway, I call that twisting the Sharia to refuse to take responsibility, unfortunately some fanatics resist true progress by trying to run behind Sharia. Obviously this doesn't work for the sane and sceptical people, but you know what? It's sad that they even use it.

Ofcourse under Sharia, their rights don't disappear but try telling the big Sheikhs that. There ARE some bits of Sharia we CAN'T expect non-Muslims to follow, and we shouldn't force it on them.
It is a way of life and on a personal scale we can't pick and choose, Islamically, but on a political level we have to legislate with the guidance of the Quran, Sunnah and our own judgement, and like it or not, mate, society may not be ready for certain laws yet and we can't expect people to follow some laws.

You want to know how in some aspects Britain runs more in accordance to Shariah than some "Islamic Countries?"
Isn't it an Islamic principle that everyone is innocent until proven guilty? That it's better to be too lenient than to to be too harsh? Are you denying that?
Isn't Social Justice part of the Sharia? And don't we have at least some of that here with NI and income tax contributions and free health care? It's not enough social justice, I know and Brown wants to reduce it, but at least there's a little bit there.

My point exactly!!!!!!!

Courage wrote:

which is bull! I really felt like finishing that word but I don't know if Admin would allow that.

of course he would.

1R4M wrote:

Hmmm

Interesting point

When an Islamic state HAS been created, it has not been a success
Saudi
Afghanistan
Pakistan
Iran
thyere not total disasters but theyre not brilliant at the same time
Not one country applies Islamic principles properly. They're all corrupt

They arent islamic states, pakistan is a islamic republic so is iran, saudi is a kingdom iran so none of them are islamic states because they dont correspond a 100% to islamic shariah although they can get pretty close they arent if they where it would be pretty safe to say they would be pretty sucessfull. Also these "islamic states" havent necessarilly been created to serve islam rather to fuel the ambitions and the egos of the people creating the nations.

love to live but living to die wrote:

Omrow wrote:

Live up to your name.

that's just reminded me of cartoons i used to watch in me early teens... it came on on Cartoon Network... it was called "Courage the cowardly dog"... i use to love em

Yeah I used to watch that too. But I wasn't really thinking of him when I signed up.